Revisiting the role of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate change (UNFCCC) and the Kyoto protocol in the fight against emissions from international civil aviation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The issue of Climate Change emanating from increasing climate emissions and the need for reduction of aviation emission are part of the prominent sustainable environmental rights issues facing the world. The United Nations Conference of Parties (COP24) in Poland in 2018 held under the auspices of UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol declared that Climate Change is at the crossroad and ended with a general global consensus of limiting emission below 2o Celcius by the year 2020. However, a lot of issues have been raised on why the global increase in discharge of aviation emission has continued despite the activities of UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol at reducing global atmospheric emissions that cause climate change and other environmental degradations like flood, hurricane, draught and diseases. This paper assesses the contributions of United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change and Kyoto Protocol to global reduction of aviation emission with a view to providing distinct information that will further assist policy makers on a lasting solution tothe problem of aviation emission. Using doctrinal research method, the paper concludes that even though both the UNFCCC and Kyoto Protocol laid the foundation for International law on reduction of aviation emission, they have not made a satisfactory contribution to reduction of aviation emission. Keywords: Assessment, UNFCCC, Kyoto Protocol, Global Climate Emissions, Civil Aviation, Aviation Emission
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.016 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".