COSIS’ Quest for Climate Justice: A Brief History of the ITLOS Advisory Opinion
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article provides a brief history of the origins of the Commission of Small Island States on Climate Change and International Law ( COSIS ) and its request for an ITLOS advisory opinion. In doing so, it will position COSIS ’ journey and the unanimous 2024 ITLOS Advisory Opinion in a broader context of climate justice. Against a backdrop of long-standing frustrations with the failings of the UNFCCC and Paris Agreement COP process to abate dangerous climate change and keep global warming below 1.5 °C, small island States are aware that existing obligations under international law already support their fundamental demands. They have thus taken the reins in a turn to international courts and tribunals in an attempt to level the playing field against major emitters. This brief history and case analysis will reflect on this historic move, discussing the relationship between the parallel proceedings before ITLOS and the ICJ , as well as the procedural and substantive significance of the 2024 ITLOS Advisory Opinion.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".