Litigating for legality: Nature conservation, commercial fisheries and disputed territoriality in Ukraine's Danube Delta
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Between 2014 and 2016, Ukraine's Danube Biosphere Reserve (DBR) administrators devoted extensive time to lawsuits in which they defended the legality of commercial fisheries in reserve territory. Two cases are discussed in order to examine what impact litigation had and why administrators pursued litigation when dominant accounts of law in Ukraine suggest that avoiding the courts might be a more likely response. It analyzes court documents and interviews gathered during anthropological research about nature conservation in the Danube Delta by combining insights from political ecology, agrarian studies, and socio‐legal scholarship on Ukraine. Even though administrators lost their cases and had to rezone the reserve, engaging in litigation helped them defend fishing commons against further enclosure by environmentalists, state officials, and business people, and to minimize predatory behavior that could exclude delta residents. This demonstrates litigation's important but often overlooked role in challenging the outcomes of natural resource‐related internal state territorialization.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".