MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161948812 · doi:10.82308/23976

Compliance with international law : the Kyoto protocol's compliance mechanisms as an effective tool to promote compliance?

2003· dissertation· en· W7161948812 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Friedrich, Jurgën, 1975-

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompliance (psychology)Kyoto ProtocolInternational lawIncentiveOrder (exchange)Montreal Protocol

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis presents an assessment of the effectiveness of the compliance mechanisms of the Kyoto Protocol in promoting compliance with the obligations under the Protocol. First, theoretical approaches to compliance are explored in order to understand the reasons for which states comply, using both international legal and international relations theory. This not only contributes to a greater understanding of compliance, but also helps to establish a framework of criteria for the assessment. Second, practical experience with the compliance mechanisms of the Montreal Protocol is used to develop further assessment criteria. Following a detailed description and analysis of the compliance mechanisms, the insights from theory and practice are applied. The results show that the Kyoto Protocol's compliance mechanisms present an innovative balance of managerial and incentive strategies and integrate important elements emphasised by constructivist approaches to international law. They are thus designed effectively to promote compliance with the Kyoto Protocol.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.082
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.081
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.082
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0820.081
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.016
Scholarly communication0.0100.018
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0070.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.328 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWorld Trade Organization LawFrench-language works237,207