From polar ice to policy : the role of US and other key actors in arctic climate change, energy transition and geopolitical dynamics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Dissertation, analyzes the fight in which the strongest international actors, such as the USA, Canada and Russia, have engaged in the Arctic. In particular, the current situation of the Arctic and the increasing consequences of climate change and the significant effects of the reduction of Arctic ice on biodiversity, indigenous communities, and the global climate are first analyzed. Next, the enormous potential of its energy sector is analyzed, examining the importance of fossil fuels and the prospects for transitioning to clean forms of energy. At the same time, initiatives for the development of renewable energy sources and technological innovations that promote sustainable development are analyzed, as well as the challenges facing the region for a smooth energy transition. A significant part of the analysis is devoted to the geopolitical environment of the Arctic as it has been shaped and the role played by major powers such as the US, Russia and Canada in securing their strategic interests and gaining comparative strategic advantage. International rivalries are particularly emphasized, but also the alliances formed for the exploitation of the region with the aim of securing the sovereign rights of the states that have interests in the Arctic and access to the natural resources of the region. The need to develop international cooperation to ensure the governance of the Arctic in sustainable terms is also analyzed. In this context, the current institutional framework governing the Arctic is presented through a set of international agreements, such as the Paris Agreement, as well as diplomatic initiatives and policies for the protection of the Arctic environment. The future scenarios for the Arctic, through the analysis of climate forecasts, the possible energy changes as well as the fluid nature of the geopolitical perspectives of the region are critical parameters of the analysis as well as the examination of the role of the international community in the governance of the Arctic and the need for a multilateral, collaborative approach.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".