MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379012146 · doi:10.1163/22116001-03701003

The Right to a Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment and the Triple Planetary Crisis: Reflections for Ocean Governance

2023· article· en· W4379012146 on OpenAlexaff
Sara L. Seck

Bibliographic record

VenueOcean Yearbook Online · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsPolitical scienceSustainable developmentEnvironmental lawLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract According to the United Nations Environment Programme, the world is fac-ing a triple planetary crisis of climate change, nature loss, and pollution and waste, with grave implications for human well-being. While the triple plan-etary crisis affects both marine and terrestrial ecosystems, understanding of human rights in the ocean governance context is less well developed than that of human rights on land. This is slowly changing, even as the relation-ship between human rights and the environment more generally is being clarified in international law. On July 28, 2022, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) adopted a resolution recognizing the human right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment with 161 States voting in favor and none against. This reflection will contemplate the implications of this recent development in international human rights law for ocean govern-ance at a time of triple planetary crisis. Might UNGA recognition of the right to a clean, healthy and sustainable environment contribute necessary tools to overcome the challenges of triple planetary crisis and ultimately help restore planetary, including ocean, health?

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.021
Scholarly communication0.0120.010
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0070.014
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.249 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOcean Yearbook OnlineSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207