Cited by 57Coastal and Marine ManagementEuropean Union Policy and GovernanceMarine and fisheries research

The duplicity of the European Union Common Fisheries Policy in third countries: Evidence from the Gulf of Guinea

Okafor-Yarwood, Ifesinachi, Belhabib, Dyhia·2020·Ocean & Coastal Management

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ocecoaman.2019.104953

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Authors
Okafor-Yarwood, I., & Belhabib, D.
Affiliations
King's College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Okafor-Yarwood, Ifesinachi
Venue
Ocean & Coastal Management
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2020-02
Volume
184
Pages
104953
ISSN
0964-5691 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2980435251
Cited by
57
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 16 · 2022: 9 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 3
FWCI
7.14
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Ocean & Coastal Management (publishedVersion)
  • St Andrews Research Repository (St Andrews Research Repository) (acceptedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law › Coastal and Marine Management
  • Social Sciences › Political Science and International Relations › European Union Policy and Governance
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Marine and fisheries research
Keywords
Common Fisheries Policy, Gulf of Guinea, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing, UNCLOS, fisheries governance, Liberia, Guinea-Bissau, West and Central Africa

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review