Jurisdictional Issues in the Settlement of Disputes Concerning Straddling Fish Stocks Under UNCLOS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An issue which may arise in the dispute settlement system under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) is whether international disputes over fish stocks straddling the exclusive economic zone (EEZ) and the high seas are subject to the compulsory procedures set out in UNCLOS. Fish stocks which straddle the EEZ and the high seas can create more intractable fisheries disputes. This jurisdictional issue is therefore particularly important. UNCLOS or the Fish Stocks Agreement did not resolve the ambiguity as to the applicability of the compulsory dispute settlement procedures to straddling fish stocks disputes. No definitive conclusion can be drawn from the text of UNCLOS or supplementary means of interpretation, including the travaux préparatoires. Against that background, this chapter examines the jurisdiction of adjudicative bodies acting under Part XV of UNCLOS with regard to disputes on straddling fish stocks from three viewpoints: the consent of States, the effective settlement of international disputes, and safeguarding common interests of the international community or community interests.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.028 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".