MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Environmental Law

2018· reference-entry· en· W4253585087 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Liz Fisher

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental science · 2018
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental law and policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental lawLawPublic lawPolitical scienceMunicipal lawPrivate lawComparative lawCommon lawSubject (documents)LegislationSources of law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environmental law is the law of environmental problems. It is a subject that can be traced back to ancient civilizations but has primarily developed since the 1960s as a response to democratic demands to deal with environmental degradation. It is a vast subject covering a range of topics, and what the boundaries of the subject are is often open to debate. For non-lawyers reading environmental-law scholarship and material, there are six important points to keep in mind. First, the subject is jurisdiction based. Any inquiry into environmental law needs to be accompanied with an understanding of the legal system that the inquiry relates to. The environmental law of the United States is distinct from the environmental law of Thailand and even from the environmental law of Canada. There is a large body of international environmental law, but given the nature of international law, it does not legally bind in the way national law does, and it does not exist in an automatic hierarchy with national law. Second, environmental law is “applied law” and thus often involves the application of basic legal concepts to environmental problems. Environmental law in most jurisdictions is primarily made up of legislation, and thus knowing about the legal principles of legislation is important. The role of the courts will also be important in adjudicating on legal disputes. Third, there are common themes across all jurisdictions (e.g., Environmental Law and Tragedies of the Commons and the respective roles of Science and Environmental Law and Public Participation and Access to Justice) and common legal techniques (e.g., Environmental Principles and Regulatory Strategies and Environmental Governance) and legal processes (e.g., the Role of Courts and regulatory Enforcement). It is these common themes that are often the focus of scholarly attention and debate. This article has been structured with this in mind. Research within the field will be more successful if questions are as focused as they can be in relation to themes and jurisdictions. Fourth, this is a fast-moving area of law, and the environmental-law regime of a jurisdiction can change quickly. The law of a decade ago may not be the law now. Fifth, given the social and environmental complexity of environmental problems, the subject is heavily influenced by writings from other disciplines, particularly writings that relate to environmental problems and how a state should respond to them. Sixth, there is no obvious “canon” of environmental-law scholarship due to the jurisdiction-based, fast-paced, and diverse nature of the subject.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.661
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.020
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.010

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental scienceSame topicEnvironmental law and policyFrench-language works237,207