Good Governance and Legal Challenges in Drafting International Oil and Gas Contracts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The oil and gas industry, as one of the strategic sectors of the global economy, plays a pivotal role in economic development and energy supply. In Iran, the high dependence of the national economy on oil revenues makes the efficient management of this industry imperative. This article focuses on the concept of good governance and examines the legal challenges in drafting international oil and gas contracts, while proposing solutions to enhance the structure of such agreements. Good governance, through principles such as transparency, accountability, rule of law, and public participation, can reduce corruption, attract investor confidence, and ensure resource sustainability. The identified legal challenges include conflicts between national and international laws, information asymmetry, corruption, international sanctions, complexities in negotiations, environmental issues, and weaknesses in contract enforcement. These obstacles hinder the realization of good governance principles and affect the effectiveness of contracts. Contract theory and risk distribution frameworks provide theoretical foundations for analyzing these challenges and emphasize the importance of balancing interests, flexibility, and transparency. International experiences, such as those of Norway and Canada, demonstrate the success of good governance in sustainable resource management, while examples like Nigeria and Venezuela reveal the consequences of weak governance. The proposed solutions include improving the transparency of bidding processes, strengthening independent regulatory institutions, designing flexible contracts, joining international initiatives such as the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), involving local communities, employing modern technologies, enhancing human capacity, and developing comprehensive legal frameworks. These reforms can increase the effectiveness of contracts and strengthen Iran’s position in the global energy market. The implementation of these solutions, especially under sanction conditions, requires political will and international cooperation to achieve sustainable and equitable development in Iran’s oil and gas industry.
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 | 0.075 | 0.107 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".