MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4200139301 · doi:10.35808/ersj/2683

The Rivalry Over the Arctic Strategic Resources and Russia’s Role

2021· article· en· W4200139301 on OpenAlex
Michał Romańczuk, Wojciech Jędrzejewski

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueEUROPEAN RESEARCH STUDIES JOURNAL · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRivalryArcticThe arcticBusinessEconomic geographyInternational tradeEconomicsOceanographyGeologyMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose: Climate changes have made previously inaccessible Arctic resources (oil, natural gas, and many metal ores, including nickel, zinc, lead and diamonds) available for extraction. With this change, the region has become an area of economic and geopolitical rivalry, where the five Arctic states (Canada, Denmark, Iceland, Norway, Russia, USA) compete with each other and external powers (e.g., China) for control over the territory and its strategic resources. The paper looks into whether those resources warrant the rivalry, and analyses methods and instruments used to establish the said control. Design/Methodology/Approach: The paper focuses on the Russian activities in the region and approaches them from the realistic perspective on international relations. The offensive realism of John J. Mearsheimer is considered as particularly important to the problem under the study. It posits that states strive to maximise their relative power in order to survive in the anarchic, self-help international system. Findings: In absence of legally-binding, universally-accepted territorial division of the Arctic and a great power able to prevent them to do so, Russian authorities have been gradually building up the country’s presence in the region. As a result, Russia’s control over part the Arctic and its strategic resources has become a fait accompli. It increased the country’s power and security, and strengthened position in future political negotiations on the Arctic issues. Practical Implications: The results of the research may contribute to the analysis of the economic and political situation in the Arctic and help companies to draft investment strategies toward the region. Originality/Value: The paper is a case study in geopolitical consequences of the climate changes and analysis of situation in the one of the most important regions of the world. It presents the state-of-affairs of energy investments in the region. It also contributes to the knowledge on economic methods and instruments of establishing control over the Arctic (a planned follow-up study will focus on military tools and activities).

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.652
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0160.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.160
GPT teacher head0.437
Teacher spread0.277 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it