Right to the favourable environment in Czech law and the law of British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
- 76 - SUMMARY RIGHT TO A HEALTHY ENVIRONMENT IN CZECH LAW AND IN THE LAW OF BRITISH COLUMBIA Master's degree dissertation compares right to a healthy environment in the Czech Republic and in British Columbia, a Canadian province, and makes this comparison upon a variety of standpoints. The work also broaches the environmental regulation in both these mentioned countries in general, as the regulation gives us the context in which the right in question is applied and enforced. The first part of the work is an introductory part that leads us into the area. The first part of work compares definition of fundamental terms related to the focus of this work between legal systems of the Czech Republic and British Columbia. The comparison shows the term "environment" is defined in both these countries quite similarly, but the term "healthy environment" is in none of these countries defined positively, but rather negatively, by enacting values and conditions under which environment can be declared unhealthy. The following part describes the development of legal regulation of environment and in that scope also the right to a healthy environment. The chapter shows that British Columbia, in its hundred years of modern history of legal protection of environment, developed into a phase where environmental law is basically...
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".