MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402389662 · doi:10.22215/cjers.v17i1.4440

Geopolitical Conflict and Cross-Border Cooperation between the EU and Russia

2024· article· en· W4402389662 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Joan DeBardeleben

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Canadian Journal of European and Russian Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGeopoliticsCross-border cooperationPolitical scienceInternational conflictInternational tradeGeographyEconomic geographyBusinessPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the hypothesis that geopolitical tensions at the macro-level (e.g., between the EU and Russia) may be mirrored differently at the national and local levels. Despite the general EU freeze in relations with Russia after the Crimean annexation of 2014 until March 2022, the EU continued to provide support for cross-border cooperation programs at the local level between actors in Russia and those EU states that border Russia. The paper examines the manner in which CBC initiatives with the Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland) were treated in Russian media in the period following the 2014 Ukraine crisis until 2021. The purpose of the media analysis is to determine the extent to which the Russian side made a linkage between the local cooperation and geopolitical tensions, with Polish media coverage providing a comparative reference point. The analysis finds that while geopolitical events can, under extreme circumstances, severely interfere with local dynamics that may promote cooperation in international relations, in the face of less severe geopolitical tension local cross-border initiatives can proceed relatively undisturbed, particularly if they have a non-political nature. Un répit au milieu des tensions géopolitiques ? La coopération transfrontalière entre la Russie et l’Union européenne dans les médias russes de 2014 à 2021 Cet article explore l’hypothèse que les tensions géopolitiques à grande échelle, par exemple entre l’Union européenne (UE) et la Russie, ne sont pas nécessairement répliquées à l’identique aux niveaux national et local. Malgré le gel des relations entre la Russie et l’UE après l’annexion de la Crimée en 2014, jusqu’en mars 2022 l’UE a maintenu des programmes de coopération transfrontalière à l’échelle locale entre des acteurs en Russie et les États de l’UE qui partagent une frontière avec ce pays. L’article examine comment les médias russes ont couvert les initiatives transfrontalières avec les pays baltes et la Pologne au cours de la période de 2014 à 2021 qui a suivi la crise d’Ukraine. Le but de cette analyse des médias est de déterminer dans quelle mesure les Russes établissent un lien entre la coopération à l’échelle locale et les tensions géopolitiques ; les médias polonais servent à établir un point de référence pour la comparaison. Les résultats de l’analyse concluent que la coopération transfrontalière locale peut se poursuivre sans interruption face à des tensions géopolitiques moindres et ce surtout si elle n’est pas de nature politique. Les dynamiques locales de promotion des relations internationales ne sont impactées sévèrement par les tensions géopolitiques que dans des circonstances extrêmes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.408
Teacher spread0.352 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Canadian Journal of European and Russian StudiesSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207