The Right to a Clean, Healthy and Sustainable Environment and the Triple Planetary Crisis: Reflections for Ocean Governance
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
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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