MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

International Environmental Law

2013· reference-entry· en· W4254889117 on OpenAlexaff
Jutta Brunnée

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEnvironmental lawInternational lawSustainable developmentEquity (law)Political scienceGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsNatural resourceIntergenerational equitySustainabilityLaw and economicsBusinessLawEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

International environmental law encompasses the legal norms and processes that address transboundary, regional, or global environmental issues. International environmental concerns generally result from human impacts on the natural environment, such as pollution or resource use related to production or consumption processes. Environmental problems pose at least five distinctive challenges for international law. First, because they typically result from private activities (Nonstate Actors) rather than from government action, international environmental law must either engage these actors directly or, as has been the predominant approach to date, prompt states to regulate private actors under their jurisdictions. Second, because international environmental problems, or scientific understanding of them, tend to evolve rapidly and sometimes unexpectedly, international environmental law often operates under conditions of uncertainty and must be adaptable to changing needs or knowledge. Third, international environmental law must deal with multiple interconnections. International environmental problems, by definition, not only transcend jurisdictional boundaries, but they also implicate social, political, and economic processes, as has come to be expressed through the concept of sustainable development (Sustainable Development). Moreover, because many international environmental problems are intertwined with one another, action or inaction on one issue implicates one or more other issues. Fourth, many international environmental issues, and virtually all global environmental concerns, require cooperation between industrialized and developing countries (History and Evolution), raising complex and highly charged questions of equity and capacity (Common but Differentiated Responsibilities). Finally, international environmental problems frequently require not only the balancing of potentially competing contemporary interests and priorities, but also have significant implications for future generations of humanity (Intergenerational Equity). The evolution of international environmental law has been shaped by these closely intertwined challenges (History and Evolution). Customary or soft law principles (Key Principles) have emerged that reflect the various dimensions sketched above. Perhaps in recognition of the fact that environmental problem-solving requires cooperation rather than confrontation, the primary role of these principles has been to help frame the negotiation and operation of international environmental agreements (Multilateral Environmental Agreements) and the activities of international institutions (International Environmental Institutions). Indeed, the bulk of international environmental lawmaking, implementation, and compliance control (Compliance Mechanisms) occurs today under the auspices of the hundreds of environmental agreements that are now in existence. International courts and tribunals (Courts and Tribunals) have played only a relatively small role in the application of customary or treaty law to environmental issues in the course of dispute settlement. Similarly, the law of state responsibility has found only limited application in the environmental context and states have preferred to negotiate civil liability regimes to address specific risks, such as those posed by oil pollution or nuclear energy production (Responsibility and Liability). This article focuses on the major structural elements and key characteristics of international environmental law rather than on developments in the various substantive issue areas.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient 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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.441
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5140.073

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207