Island Studies Journal 8(1), Book Reviews
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The thrust to independence for the remaining colonies slowly ground to a halt in the last part of the Twentieth century.In consequence there now remain a good number of mostly island territories for which sovereign independence is no longer seen as an option.Twenty five of these have a unique relationship with the European Union (EU) defined by the term 'Overseas Countries and Territories' (OCT), eleven of which are British, six French, six Dutch and one Danish.Under the terms of the Overseas Association Decision (OAD) adopted in 2001, the OCT have a special and unique relationship with the EU which provides them with preferential trading arrangements and very modest levels of development assistance, among other benefits.The OAD is now under consideration for revision as of the end of 2013.It and the OCT relationship with the EU is little known in the EU and little discussed in the OCT or within the EU member states to which they are associated.It has equally been ignored by the academic community.This book by Adler-Nissen and Gad is the first comprehensive comparative study of the OCT relationship with a particular focus on the triangular relationship linking together the OCT at one corner, the European Commission at another and the member states to which the OCT are linked at the third.It seeks to set out, via theoretical considerations and a number of case studies, the nature of the relationship and come to conclusions on the meaning of sovereignty as exemplified by the practice of the OCT and the EU.The book is essentially in two parts.The first five chapters and the Conclusion deal with general and theoretical issues discussing sovereignty, the nature of the EU, the experience of micropolities and the character of the relationship between the OCTs and the Commission.The second part consists largely of case studies of the experiences of British, French, Dutch and Danish OCTs with their respective metropoles and with the EU, framed within some consideration of the wider picture of British and French decolonization policy in particular.The case studies discuss questions of sovereignty and how the relationship with the EU is reflected in current policies and mediated through the relationship each OCT has with its respective metropolitan member state.The picture that emerges is, not surprisingly, highly differentiated and context dependent.The introduction by Gad and Adler-Nissen focuses on sovereignty and the concept of 'sovereignty games' through which they seek to order the book.A sovereignty game exploits the ambivalent nature of sovereignty in the modern world, seeing sovereignty not as a condition you either 'have' or 'do not have', but rather as one which you may sometimes have and exercise in certain functional areas even if you are not technically sovereign i.e. are not formally recognized as a sovereign state.In their different ways, both the OCTs and the EU play sovereignty games, even though they are not legally 'sovereign'.As such, one can conceptualize OCTs as 'nation state like polities' which deploy sovereignty games to promote their various interests both with the EU and with their respective metropoles.The purpose of the book is to identify and analyse such games.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.108 | 0.034 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".