Canada and St. Pierre and Miquelon Transboundary Relations: Battles and Bridges
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The French islands of St. Pierre and Miquelon, perched off the end of the Burin Peninsula, southeast of the Cabot Strait and the Gulf of St. Lawrence (see Figure 1), have, through a unique combination of geography, history and resources, presented Canada with one of the more challenging examples of transboundary relations in the marine context off its coasts. The islands, with a total area of 242 km and a population of approximately 7,000, have been the focus both of longstanding conflicts over sovereignty, jurisdiction and resources, and repeated efforts at conflict resolution, including the 1992 arbitration of the maritime boundary. In the modern era, the parties have gone beyond simple resolution of conflicts and have at least attempted to engage in active transboundary cooperation. This chapter considers the current status and future prospects of efforts at bilateral cooperative management of the resources and uses of the marine areas in the area of St. Pierre and Miquelon and the neighboring regions of Canada, with a particular focus on fisheries issues. Any understanding of the present and future management of marine resources in this area, however, first requires a brief review of the history of conflicts which has set the context, both from a jurisdictional and policy standpoint, for the situation facing both countries today.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".