Lov tuleňů v Arktidě: Porovnání rozdílných pohledů na Evropskou regulaci 1007/2009
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On September 16, 2009 the European parliament adopted a Regulation (EC) 1007/2009 prohibiting the seal products from being imported and placed on the European Union market. Adoption of a Seal trade ban was a result of an effective anti-sealing lobby and increasing public concern over the perceivably cruel seal hunting methods that emerged in reaction to growing popularity of seal fur in early 2000s. Even though the Seal ban includes an exception for Inuit who hunt seals traditionally for subsistence and depend on monetary income to maintain their traditions, it proved to be highly ineffective as the demand for all seal products declined dramatically, threatening Inuit way of life in the process. The purpose of this thesis is to examine the key actors involved in the conflict, specifically the Inuit, the European Union, animal welfare NGOs and the Canadian government and to contextualize and analyze the specific narratives of the seal hunting discourse and their implications. By looking at the motivation and justification of the EU Seal ban as well as the implications of the different perspectives on the issue, this research will try to test the hypothesis that the seal hunting discourse is based on a colonial mindset and that decolonization of the mind is yet to be achieved by Western society.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| 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".