International environmental law principles: a new solution for the space debris problem?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Satellites orbiting the Earth form the exoskeleton of the world's critical infrastructure: global communications, air transport, maritime trade, financial services and weather monitoring all depend on an expansive network of satellites in space.There are however inherent consequences to human activities in outer space.The most critical challenge to the safety, security, and sustainability of outer space is the threat posed by space debris to the spacecraft of all nations.The emerging commercialization, democratization and militarization of space has led to the growth of space debris, heavily concentrated in the orbits where human activities take place.In light of this challenge, this thesis analyzes international space law treaties and soft-law instruments with a view to determine their relevance and effectiveness in addressing the space debris dilemma.It recommends that legal principles from a different legal frameworkinternational environmental law -be applied in outer space to impose stronger obligations on spacefaring countries, and lead to a more successful and equitable strategy to preserve the outer space environment.In practical terms, the precautionary principle, the no-harm rule, and the common but differentiated responsibilities principle should lead to: (1) greater compliance with space debris mitigation measures to stabilize the debris population; (2) improved space situational awareness programs with more detailed and accurate data-sharing between States; and(3) continued research, investment, and the eventual implementation of space debris removal mechanisms.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".