MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403370367 · doi:10.1093/yiel/yvae008

Arctic

2023· article· en· W4403370367 on OpenAlexaff
David VanderZwaag

Bibliographic record

VenueYearbook of International Environmental Law · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticThe arcticEnvironmental scienceGeographyOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This year, initiatives relevant to Arctic environmental protection occurred through the Arctic Council and other international cooperative avenues. These include advancing implementation of the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean, working through the International Maritime Organization (IMO) to further address Arctic shipping issues, and seeking environmental cooperation through the Barents Euro-Arctic Council. Arctic Council activities were substantially curbed this year due to Russia’s continued military activities against Ukraine. The thirteenth meeting of the Arctic Council was held in May in Salekhard, Russian Federation, and online, but only a one-page statement, rather than a ministerial declaration, was issued on 11 May. Arctic States and Permanent Participants acknowledged the commitment to safeguard and strengthen the Arctic Council and agreed to continue Council activities for 2023–5 based on previous work plans, which included the Reykjavik Ministerial Declaration of May 2021 and the Arctic Council Strategic Plan 2021–30. The statement further acknowledged the Russian Federation’s conclusion of a second term as chair of the Council and accepted Norway’s offer to act as chair of the Council in 2023–5 and to host the fourteenth meeting of the Council in 2025. In August, consensus was reached to allow Arctic Council working groups to advance project activities via written procedures but still not through official virtual meetings ( and Statement (11 May 2023) ). As the new Council chair, Norway announced four thematic priorities for its chairship ( ). A second in-person meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP) to the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean (COAFA) was held in Incheon, Korea, on 12–14 June ( ). The COP adopted a Joint Program of Scientific Research and Monitoring (JPSRM) Framework, which incorporates a Data Management and Sharing Protocol. The JPSRM will focus on three ecologically linked zones—not only the high seas of the central Arctic Ocean (Agreement Area) but also peripheral continental shelf/slope areas and the Pacific and Atlantic gateways. The JPSRM, through mapping and monitoring phases, will assess four main issues: the status of knowledge and gaps in knowledge regarding ecosystem structures and functions in the Agreement Area and adjacent waters; prospects for sustainable commercial fisheries in the Agreement Area; potential impacts of commercial fisheries on marine ecosystems linked to the central Arctic Ocean; and potential impacts of commercial fisheries on Arctic indigenous and local communities. Attendees at the COP adopted the Rules of Procedure for the Scientific Coordinating Group (SCG), which is tasked with supporting scientific work under the CAOFA. Each party to the Agreement is to be a member of the SCG and each member is to be represented by a delegation that may include scientists, technical experts, holders of Indigenous knowledge, and holders of local knowledge. At the COP, an agenda was set for further implementation steps. The SCG was tasked with developing a detailed implementation plan for the JPSRM Framework by June 2024. An Ad Hoc Working Group on Exploratory Fishing was established in order to develop, by June 2024, a draft text of Conservation and Management Measures for exploratory fishing. Parties agreed to meet in person for a third COP in Korea in June 2024, at a date to be confirmed by the hosts. At its 107th session is June, the IMO’s Maritime Safety Committee adopted amendments to the Polar Shipping Code to extend safety of navigation and voyage planning requirements to a range of smaller vessels ( ). The requirements will apply to three categories of ships while operating in polar waters: fishing vessels of twenty-four metres in length and above; pleasure yachts of three hundred gross tonnage (GT) and upwards not engaged in trade; and cargo ships of three hundred GT and upwards but below five hundred GT. Navigational equipment must be able to function under expected environmental conditions in the area of operation and ships must have the ability to visually detect ice when operating in darkness. In voyage planning, masters of vessels must take into account various factors in determining a route including, among others, known areas of marine mammal densities and seasonal migration areas and any national and international protected areas. The topic of reducing the impact on the Arctic of black carbon emissions from international shipping was further considered by the IMO’s Sub-Committee on Pollution Prevention and Response and the Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC). However, no further agreement was reached regarding black carbon control measures and the geographic scope of Arctic waters that might be covered (MEPC 80/17 (28 July 2023), para 5.15). In April, Canada informed the MEPC of its plan to submit a proposal to the eighty-first session of the MFPC in 2024 for the designation of an Emission Control Area in Canadian Arctic waters. Such a designation would aim to reduce emission of nitrogen oxides, sulphur oxides, and particulate matter, including black carbon (MEPC 80/16/2 (27 April 2023)). Cooperation in the Barents Euro-Arctic Region, although curtailed due to Russia’s continued military activities against Ukraine, was able to continue. Following Russia’s withdrawal from the BEAC in September, members of the BEAC met in Joensuu, Finland, on 24 October, issued a joint statement welcoming the interim trio presidency of Finland, Sweden, and Norway for a one-year period, and encouraged them to drive Barents cooperation forward ( ). In the spring, the Finnish chair presented a joint Green Transition Action Plan for the northern regions of Finland, Sweden, and Norway and encouraged the respective governments to implement proposed recommendations, which include the need to develop a regulatory environment to support green investments including in fossil free energy. A subgroup of the BEAC’s Working Group on Environment, Friends of Sustainable Production and Consumption is undertaking various project activities, including Sustainable Green Transition in the Barents Region, 2023–5 and Climate Work in the Barents Region, 2023–4. The eleventh Barents Parliamentary Conference was held in Rovaniemi, Finland, on 25–7 September. Its conclusions emphasized that the Green Transition needs to be secured while respecting the culture and human rights of peoples living in the region, including the implementation of the prior and informed consent principle with regard to the indigenous Sámi people ( ).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.423
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.4230.304

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.272 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueYearbook of International Environmental LawSame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207