MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407799889 · doi:10.1163/17087384-bja10107

Exploration and Exploitation of Seabed Minerals in the Tanzanian Maritime Zones and Beyond the Limits of National Jurisdiction

2025· article· en· W4407799889 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vicent Bartholomew Mtavangu

Bibliographic record

VenueAfrican Journal of Legal Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicInternational Maritime Law Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the SeaSeabedExclusive economic zoneJurisdictionTerritorial watersLaw of the seaTanzaniaInternational lawOceanographyMaritime boundaryInternational watersLegislationGeologyLawEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental planningGeographyPolitical sciencePublic international law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Tanzania is one of the coastal states of the Indian Ocean. It is also an active state party to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). This international instrument regulates, among others, the exploration and exploitation of seabed minerals, especially in the deep sea. Tanzania has promulgated a law to implement the UNCLOS. Additionally, the country has various regulations to fully benefit from the marine mineral resources found in its maritime domain. However, the existing legal framework does not adequately and comprehensively cover the exploration and exploitation of seabed minerals within the Tanzanian maritime zones and beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, the Area. This means that the current pieces of legislation only and partly touch on mining activities within the territorial sea, continental shelf and the EEZ. None of them regulates seabed mining in the Area. Thus, this article discusses the need for Tanzania to enact comprehensive and adequate legal frameworks governing seabed mining in its maritime zones and the Area.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.268 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAfrican Journal of Legal StudiesSame topicInternational Maritime Law IssuesFrench-language works237,207