The EU as an Arctic Power: Analysis of the Competence of the EU in the Arctic by Policy Areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The European Union is not generally perceived as an Arctic power. However, the ever-expanding list of EU competences implies that it will have both an interest in participating in the governance of the Arctic and the authority to do so, should the seven Arctic states agree to make room. This development holds both challenges and opportunities for Canada and other Arctic states. The challenges stem from the fact that the EU will seek to promote the economic interests of its Member States in resource extraction and freedom of navigation where Canada and Russia, in particular, have asserted strong national policies. The opportunities lie in the fact that the EU is likely to support strong environmental protection and to be ready to finance enhanced scientific research. Having incurred the wrath of indigenous peoples of the Arctic with its seal products ban, the EU faces particular difficulties in trying to participate in the Circumpolar Conference.L'Union europeenne n'est generalement pas consideree comme une puissance arctique. Cependant, la liste toujours en croissance des competences de TUE signifie qu'elle aura a la fois interet a participer a la gouvernance de l'Arctique et l'autorite pour le faire si les sept Etats arctiques l'acceptent. Cette situation presente tant des defis que des possibilites pour le Canada et les autres pays arctiques. Les defis decoulent du fait que TUE cherchera a promouvoir les interets economiques de ses Etats membres pour ce qui est de l'extraction des ressources et de la liberte de navigation alors que le Canada et Russie en particulier ont fait valoir de fortes politiques nationales. Les possibilites viennent de ce qu'il est probable que TUE appuie des mesures fortes de protection de l'environnement et qu'elle soit disposee a financer une recherche scientifique accrue. Apres avoir provoque la colere des peuples indigenes de l'Arctique avec son interdiction des produits du phoque, TUE fait face a des difficultes particulieres alors qu'elle tente de participer a la Conference circumpolaire.IntroductionI. Elaboration of an EU Arctic policyII. The external competence of the EU on the Arctic1. The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea and related regional fishery management organizations2. The International Maritime Organization3. International instruments concerning environmental protectionIII. The integrated maritime policy (IMP)IV. Maritime shippingV. FisheriesVI. Resource exploitation on the continental shelf and in the international seabed areaVII. Environmental protection1. Marine pollution2. Climate change3. Security and civil protectionVIII. Scientific research programmes related to the Arctic1. SIOS-Towards an integrated Arctic earth observation system (SIOS)2. ArcRisk3. EU Arctic footprint4. Ice2sea5. EUROPOLAR6. The Arctic tipping pointsConclusionIntroductionThe involvement of the European Union (EU) in the Arctic has increased considerably over the last years. There has been the discovery of new opportunities to exploit the resources of the region due to the reduction of the volume of ice as a consequence of climate change, and the region has thus acquired a strategic importance for the EU as well as for the other Arctic stakeholders. Few think of the EU as an Arctic power today, nevertheless this may change in the future. As the EU defines its international personality and expands its fields of action, it is gradually being drawn into debates concerning the governance of the Arctic region. Two EU member states, Sweden and Finland, have territory in the Arctic Circle. A third, Denmark, is the sovereign over Greenland although, by agreement, Greenland is not included within the ambit of EU law and competence. Through its association with Norway and Iceland in the European Economic Area (EEA), much EU law extends to their Arctic regions. …
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".