A level playing field for "open skies": the need for consistent and harmonized regulation of Aviation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various initiatives by regulators in different jurisdictions over the past two decades have completely reshaped the airline industry in ways that were unimaginable in 1992. From an industry dominated by Pan Am and Trans World Airlines (TWA), and newly privatized airlines such as British Airways, today's industry is dominated by government-owned intercontinental airlines based in the Middle East and carrying passengers the majority of whom are ultimately destined for States other than the States where the airlines are based. Insufficient thought has been given to whether this evolution is desirable, whether it involves profound competitive distortions or whether it is in the public interest that the majority of Australians visiting Europe are carried by an airline based in neither jurisdiction or that a similar claim might be made with respect to traffic between South Asia and the Americas. This thesis examines the events that have reshaped the international aviation industry over the two decades between 1992 and 2012. It will critically analyze the major developments and the regulatory responses and highlight some of the incompatible and disjointed regulations that are in effect at either end of international routes. It ultimately proposes that Australia, Canada, the European Union (EU), New Zealand and the United States (US) form a small international organization, to be known as the Open Skies International Aviation Block (OSIAB). OSIAB would be based on expanding the membership of the US-EU Joint Committee foreseen in the 2007 US-EU Open Skies Agreement and expanding its scope to cover every aspect of the regulation of international commercial aviation. This thesis argues such a forum is necessary to ensure that regulations in different countries are aligned so that competitive distortions potentially caused by regulatory disharmony are minimized, thus allowing the international airline industry to compete on the level international playing field that so many international agreements have promised to create.
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 | 0.019 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".