MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W763152686

The Periphery Beyond the Periphery: Arctic Transport in the Blind Spot of Europe

2010· article· en· W763152686 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Luc Ampleman

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Transport Conference, 2010Association for European Transport (AET) · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArcticPoliticsPolitical scienceNational securityNatural resourceEnvironmental planningCircumpolar starSovereigntyThe arcticGeographyOceanographyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper describes how the Arctic region has become a major area of discussion in the political, economic and environmental fields for several years now. This popularity is continuing to show up in an increased number of scientific publications as well as in a substantial circulation of popular books and reports in the public media. In this regard, references to the transportation as a key factor for the Arctic development are abundant. However, the general treatment of transport topics in the Arctic region still neglects some important aspects. First, the treatment of arctic transport is most often related to some restricted issues where transportation is relegated to a background role. These issues concern the security and the militarization (or demilitarization) of the Arctic; the defense of sovereignty and national interests; the development of access to natural resources and the rich economic potential (mining, fisheries, energy) of the circumpolar region; climate change and its impact on the opening of Arctic waters to navigation or international trade, environmental protection and the decontamination of infected arctic areas. Although these issues remain major, the actual treatment of arctic transport masks the concern of integrated transport systems. Beyond the cross-cutting issues, is there a political match plan for the development of an integrated transport network in the Arctic? Second, this popular treatment of transport topics, which by and large focus on spectacular Arctic issues and continue to mobilize national and international entities, seems to show local issues that are much more modest but often constitute a priority for Northerners who really inhabit the polar zone: Access to trap lines / hunting areas, mobile health care and evacuation, East-West connections, rescue services cooperation, small craft safety, adapted snowmobile networks, food safety, cost of transport, risky impact of new transport connections on access to drugs, alcohol, gambling and crime in the far north communities. It is worth mentioning in this paper that apart from Iceland, all Arctic countries have their centers of political decision-making in the “big’’ South far from the circumpolar zone. It may be argued that spectacular development in Arctic cooperation over the past 20 years has helped establish many pan-regional organizations (the Barents Euro-Arctic Council (BEAC) and its regional matching part, the Barents Regional Council (BRC); the Nordic Atlantic Cooperation (NORA); the Saami Council; the Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC), the Russian Association of Indigenous Peoples of the North (RAIPON)), all which increase the influence and rights of local stakeholders

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.583
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0030.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Transport Conference, 2010Association for European Transport (AET)Same topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207