A hundred years of Pacific halibut management in the context of global events and trends in fisheries management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Convention for the Preservation of the Halibut Fisheries of the Northern Pacific Ocean, signed between Canada and the United States of America on 2 March 1923 and ratified on 21 October 1924, established the International Fisheries Commission, renamed in 1953 to the International Pacific Halibut Commission (IPHC). It was the first international agreement for joint management of a marine fishery resource and a major milestone for development of modern standards for marine conservation. The IPHC’s centennial year is an opportunity to celebrate a remarkable history of the Commission, but also reflect on challenges that shaped its mission. Born from alarms about overfishing during World War I, the Commission gradually gained authority to implement a wide range of conservation measures through established public confidence in its basis for decisions. This paper explores the evolution of management measures applied to Pacific halibut commercial fishing shaped not only by the changing stock conditions and growing demand for seafood, but also global events and trends in fisheries management. It examines the impact of rapid commercialization of fisheries driven by population growth and technological improvements, establishment of exclusive economic zones and altered access to fishing grounds, and adoption of Agenda 21, which highlighted the importance of balancing environmental, economic, and social aspects in fisheries management. It concludes by discussing the lessons learned over the past century and their implications for future fisheries management, emphasizing the importance of international cooperation, adaptive strategies, and science-based policies in sustaining transboundary fish stocks like the Pacific halibut.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".