Hacia un nuevo marco jurídico internacional de la pesca en alta mar: la NAFO en esta encrucijada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the lack of evidence of disputes open in recent years, the fishing relations between the international actors on the two sides of the Atlantic have been far from cosy since the end of the "Halibut War". In fact, surprisingly intense legal-diplomatic activity has been underway since the late 1990s. All this activity raised hopes in both Canada and the EU that a balance had been struck between their respective interests and that an effective role could finally be set out for NAFO (the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization) in the Northwest Atlantic. The twenty-first century, however, began with substantial differences between certain NAFO members (principally Canada and Spain) over the application of the organization's rules. Serious infringements were detected in the NAFO area that were not always duly penalized by flag States, and differences re-emerged. On the one hand, the Canadian government debated the possibility of adopting positions to remedy the failure of the NAFO project: the extension of Canada's Exclusive Economic Zone, jurisdiction beyond the 200-mile limit, application of custodial management, and the reform or even replacement of NAFO. Spain and the EU, in turn, from the time the earliest signs of dispute began to appear, actively sought a multilateral solution to the problems detected in the management of NAFO. Via their participation in international forums they have advocated strengthening international fisheries organizations, furthered the creation of new IFOs in response to new requirements, and encouraged reform wherever needed, as\nin the case of NAFO. The action of Spain and the EU has also been the result of pressure brought to bear by the regions and industries most deeply involved in fishing in the area. Oddly (or not), the solution adopted in 2007 to reform and create a new NAFO Convention has not fully satisfied either the Northeastern Canadian provinces or the Spanish and Portuguese regions, but it is the equilibrium solution (admittedly unstable until it proves its effectiveness) defended by the Canadian and EU administrations. These, briefly, are the issues addressed in this article, which aims to shed light on possible laboratory tests for a new international law of high seas fisheries.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".