Equitable utilization of the atmosphere: a rights-based approach to climate change?
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper advocates for a rights-based approach to climate change. I argue that the government of a state may, and arguably, has the duty to assert and defend the rights of its inhabitants, rather than remaining passive and ultimately defending itself for alleged rights-violating acts and omissions. The premise underlying this approach is that governments exist for the purpose of protecting the sovereign rights of the state and the human rights of their inhabitants, past and future. First, the paper examines the rights of permanent sovereignty over natural rights. Second, it considers interstate cases on trans-frontier pollution, including the landmark Trail Smelter arbitration decision between the United States and Canada in 1905. Next, it discusses sovereignty as a basis for interstate climate change litigation and the balancing of sovereign rights in relation to equity, human rights, and climate change. Finally, it addresses the role of human rights in equitable allocation.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it