<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title>Repositório Coleção:</title>
  <link rel="alternate" href="http://hdl.handle.net/10071/1559" />
  <subtitle />
  <id>http://hdl.handle.net/10071/1559</id>
  <updated>2026-05-28T18:03:36Z</updated>
  <dc:date>2026-05-28T18:03:36Z</dc:date>
  <entry>
    <title>The two-pillar squeeze: Media pluralism and anti-gender politics in illiberal rights governance in Hungary</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://hdl.handle.net/10071/37356" />
    <author>
      <name>Ferreira Dias, J.</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://hdl.handle.net/10071/37356</id>
    <updated>2026-05-25T14:51:59Z</updated>
    <published>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Título próprio: The two-pillar squeeze: Media pluralism and anti-gender politics in illiberal rights governance in Hungary
Autoria: Ferreira Dias, J.
Resumo: This article develops a mechanism-based account of illiberal rights governance through what I call the “two-pillar squeeze.” In contemporary culture-war contexts, fundamental rights are pressured not only through explicit legal restrictions, but also through changes in the institutional conditions that make rights effective. The first pillar targets the legal primacy of freedom of expression and the right to seek, receive, and impart information, weakening access to public information, media independence, and the practical capacity of journalism and civil society to operate as watchdogs. The second pillar weaponizes anti-gender politics—often framed as “child protection” or public morality—to justify regulatory and administrative measures that narrow autonomy, privacy, equality, and non-discrimination while expanding discretionary power. Using Hungary as a critical case, the article shows how these pillars can reinforce each other: a degraded informational environment blunts scrutiny and accountability, enabling moralized regulation, which in turn legitimates broader interventions in the public sphere. Methodologically, it combines reflexive political science with legal analysis, tracing these dynamics in constitutional amendments, statutes, administrative practices, litigation, and European enforcement and compliance pressures.</summary>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>The conservation metadata gap: Why AI classification is a symptom, not a solution</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://hdl.handle.net/10071/37355" />
    <author>
      <name>McCarthy, C.</name>
    </author>
    <author>
      <name>Sternberg, T.</name>
    </author>
    <author>
      <name>Brooks, C.</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://hdl.handle.net/10071/37355</id>
    <updated>2026-05-25T14:37:22Z</updated>
    <published>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Título próprio: The conservation metadata gap: Why AI classification is a symptom, not a solution
Autoria: McCarthy, C.; Sternberg, T.; Brooks, C.
Resumo: Conservation science needs structured metadata captured at submission, not reconstructed afterward by artificial intelligence (AI). Each year, thousands of studies are published that could inform decisions under the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), the Kunming–Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework, the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), and National Biodiversity Strategies and Action Plans (NBSAPs). Authors know their study species, locations, methods, and often their work’s policy relevance, yet this information remains buried in article text rather than searchable metadata. While AI classification tools accelerate evidence synthesis compared to manual efforts, they attempt to extract this information post-publication, turning a simple data entry task into a complex natural language processing challenge.</summary>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>AI-assisted multi-target classification for research-policy alignment in conservation science</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://hdl.handle.net/10071/37353" />
    <author>
      <name>McCarthy, C.</name>
    </author>
    <author>
      <name>Brooks, C.</name>
    </author>
    <author>
      <name>Sternberg, T.</name>
    </author>
    <author>
      <name>Shaney, K.</name>
    </author>
    <author>
      <name>Hoshino, B.</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://hdl.handle.net/10071/37353</id>
    <updated>2026-05-25T14:26:36Z</updated>
    <published>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Título próprio: AI-assisted multi-target classification for research-policy alignment in conservation science
Autoria: McCarthy, C.; Brooks, C.; Sternberg, T.; Shaney, K.; Hoshino, B.
Resumo: Scientific research underpins effective conservation policy, yet current approaches for assessing whether scientific outputs meaningfully support defined management objectives rely primarily on manual expert review. This limitation constrains scalability, is time intensive and introduces potential bias in identifying knowledge gaps. We present a framework combining AI-assisted multi-target classification with systematic coverage analysis for automated evaluation of research alignment with conservation objectives. We compare traditional machine learning (TF-IDF + logistic regression), a generic BERT baseline, and an enhanced SciBERT approach incorporating domain-specific adaptations including multi-target architecture, balanced loss functions, and target weighting optimized for conservation science. The framework classifies research topics and conservation objective alignment, two dimensions requiring comprehension of scientific content and policy implications. We demonstrate the approach using 295 expert-annotated peer-reviewed studies from the Ross Sea region Marine Protected Area in Antarctica. Our enhanced multi-target SciBERT model achieved 70.0% macro F1, outperforming TF-IDF (59.5%) and BERT (52.0%) baselines, with per-target improvements of 21% on research topics and 14.5% on conservation objectives. The framework achieved 78% agreement with expert annotations, with particularly strong performance on conservation objective alignment (87.7% F1, 94% agreement). The integrated system successfully identified and quantified descriptive patterns in research coverage across thematic and policy dimensions, enabling systematic assessment for research prioritization and automated coverage analysis. While demonstrated in the Antarctic context, the framework architecture is broadly transferable, though successful adaptation requires retraining with domain-specific expert annotations and fine-tuning to match local management frameworks.</summary>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
  <entry>
    <title>Every man for himself and all for one: Crime, prison culture and marginality in Lisbon, Portugal</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="http://hdl.handle.net/10071/37288" />
    <author>
      <name>Zoettl, P. A.</name>
    </author>
    <id>http://hdl.handle.net/10071/37288</id>
    <updated>2026-05-18T11:15:13Z</updated>
    <published>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</published>
    <summary type="text">Título próprio: Every man for himself and all for one: Crime, prison culture and marginality in Lisbon, Portugal
Autoria: Zoettl, P. A.
Resumo: Doing time in prison is a common experience for many young people from Portugal’s economically disadvantaged urban peripheries. Prison conditions are harsh and sentences are long, particularly for drug and property offences. This article discusses the simultaneously individual and collective nature of prison life, and how inmates cope with a hostile environment that threatens their emotional and physical integrity. Traditional models of prison culture are inadequate to describe Portuguese prison society: it is only to a limited extent the result of prisoners adapting to the deprivations experienced inside, and it has little to do with supposed criminal subcultures imported from the outside. Instead, prison in Portugal has become just another venue for the ongoing struggle of marginalised citizens who seek to maintain a modicum of personal agency under adverse circumstances. The article argues that inmate culture in Portugal converges with a generalised culture of marginality, spawned by the late-liberal segregation of undesirable identities in suburban socioscapes spurned by dominant society.</summary>
    <dc:date>2026-01-01T00:00:00Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
</feed>

