As jazidas minerais do território brasileiro são bens da União. Isto posto, seu aproveitamento se dá pela iniciativa privada, a qual deve royalties pela exploração a que procede de forma compensatória. Este arranjo institucional, entretanto, somente veio a lume com a Constituição Federal de 1988 e é síntese de um movimento de entendimento legal da relação do Estado para com as jazidas minerais, na origem do qual as jazidas pertenciam ao superficiário. O movimento institucional remanesce, contudo, inconcluso, e o momento, autocontraditório, posto que o regime de aproveitamento das jazidas e os termos que determinam a destinação de royalties ao poder público, respectivamente, obsta a autonomia deste de dispor de seus bens e sub-remuneram o Estado. Propõem-se diferentes interpretações à Compensação Financeira pela Exploração de Recursos Minerais (CFEM) de sorte a demonstrar a sub-remuneração que ela proporciona. Enquanto renda destinada ao proprietário de fator natural, a CFEM se mostra ineficiente na captação de rendas diferencial e absoluta, fazendo-o apenas marginalmente. Enquanto preço de proteção ao patrimônio público, entendendo-se advir da exploração deste externalidade negativa na exata medida em que esta desrespeita o critério de sustentabilidade, a CFEM igualmente falha. Por fim, mostra-se que a práxis do mercado de commodities leva à incompreensão da fonte do valor de seus produtos, negando-o às jazidas minerais, o que a legislação atual convalida. Propõe-se, portanto, a superação do arranjo atual, quer num movimento brusco, quer por meio de paulatinas alterações que elevem a participação do Estado na renda mineira e lhe deem a primazia no dispor das jazidas. / Brazilian’s territory mineral deposits are public goods. Its exploitation it’s taken by private capitals, which pays the state royalties in compensation. This institutional arrangement, however, was founded by 1988’s Constitution and it is a synthesis of an evolution on the state-mineral deposits relation as it is understood by the Law, in whose origins the deposits used to belong to the territorial private owner. This legal understanding remains, however, incomplete, and, so far, self-contradictory, since the mineral deposits exploitation and the terms that regulate royalties payment prevent state autonomy in the face of its goods and underestimate the value of its compensation. This text purposes different kind of interpretations to the Financial Compensation by the Exploitation of Mineral Resources (CFEM) in order to demonstrate state’s undervalued royalties. As ground-rent, CFEM fails to capture differential and absolute rents, providing them in a minor portion. As a public property protection price, which exploitation provides negative externalities in disrespect to the sustainability criterion, CFEM, again, fails. At last, this text demonstrates that the commodities market mystifies its original root of value. It is proposed the institutional arrangement to be overcomed in a sudden movement or by smaller legal changes that provides the state a bigger income and exploitation primacy.

As jazidas minerais do território brasileiro são bens da União. Isto posto, seu aproveitamento se dá pela iniciativa privada, a qual deve royalties pela exploração a que procede de forma compensatória. Este arranjo institucional, entretanto, somente veio a lume com a Constituição Federal de 1988 e é síntese de um movimento de entendimento legal da relação do Estado para com as jazidas minerais, na origem do qual as jazidas pertenciam ao superficiário. O movimento institucional remanesce, contudo, inconcluso, e o momento, autocontraditório, posto que o regime de aproveitamento das jazidas e os termos que determinam a destinação de royalties ao poder público, respectivamente, obsta a autonomia deste de dispor de seus bens e sub-remuneram o Estado. Propõem-se diferentes interpretações à Compensação Financeira pela Exploração de Recursos Minerais (CFEM) de sorte a demonstrar a sub-remuneração que ela proporciona. Enquanto renda destinada ao proprietário de fator natural, a CFEM se mostra ineficiente na captação de rendas diferencial e absoluta, fazendo-o apenas marginalmente. Enquanto preço de proteção ao patrimônio público, entendendo-se advir da exploração deste externalidade negativa na exata medida em que esta desrespeita o critério de sustentabilidade, a CFEM igualmente falha. Por fim, mostra-se que a práxis do mercado de commodities leva à incompreensão da fonte do valor de seus produtos, negando-o às jazidas minerais, o que a legislação atual convalida. Propõe-se, portanto, a superação do arranjo atual, quer num movimento brusco, quer por meio de paulatinas alterações que elevem a participação do Estado na renda mineira e lhe deem a primazia no dispor das jazidas. / Brazilian’s territory mineral deposits are public goods. Its exploitation it’s taken by private capitals, which pays the state royalties in compensation. This institutional arrangement, however, was founded by 1988’s Constitution and it is a synthesis of an evolution on the state-mineral deposits relation as it is understood by the Law, in whose origins the deposits used to belong to the territorial private owner. This legal understanding remains, however, incomplete, and, so far, self-contradictory, since the mineral deposits exploitation and the terms that regulate royalties payment prevent state autonomy in the face of its goods and underestimate the value of its compensation. This text purposes different kind of interpretations to the Financial Compensation by the Exploitation of Mineral Resources (CFEM) in order to demonstrate state’s undervalued royalties. As ground-rent, CFEM fails to capture differential and absolute rents, providing them in a minor portion. As a public property protection price, which exploitation provides negative externalities in disrespect to the sustainability criterion, CFEM, again, fails. At last, this text demonstrates that the commodities market mystifies its original root of value. It is proposed the institutional arrangement to be overcomed in a sudden movement or by smaller legal changes that provides the state a bigger income and exploitation primacy.

As jazidas minerais do território brasileiro são bens da União. Isto posto, seu aproveitamento se dá pela iniciativa privada, a qual deve royalties pela exploração a que procede de forma compensatória. Este arranjo institucional, entretanto, somente veio a lume com a Constituição Federal de 1988 e é síntese de um movimento de entendimento legal da relação do Estado para com as jazidas minerais, na origem do qual as jazidas pertenciam ao superficiário. O movimento institucional remanesce, contudo, inconcluso, e o momento, autocontraditório, posto que o regime de aproveitamento das jazidas e os termos que determinam a destinação de royalties ao poder público, respectivamente, obsta a autonomia deste de dispor de seus bens e sub-remuneram o Estado. Propõem-se diferentes interpretações à Compensação Financeira pela Exploração de Recursos Minerais (CFEM) de sorte a demonstrar a sub-remuneração que ela proporciona. Enquanto renda destinada ao proprietário de fator natural, a CFEM se mostra ineficiente na captação de rendas diferencial e absoluta, fazendo-o apenas marginalmente. Enquanto preço de proteção ao patrimônio público, entendendo-se advir da exploração deste externalidade negativa na exata medida em que esta desrespeita o critério de sustentabilidade, a CFEM igualmente falha. Por fim, mostra-se que a práxis do mercado de commodities leva à incompreensão da fonte do valor de seus produtos, negando-o às jazidas minerais, o que a legislação atual convalida. Propõe-se, portanto, a superação do arranjo atual, quer num movimento brusco, quer por meio de paulatinas alterações que elevem a participação do Estado na renda mineira e lhe deem a primazia no dispor das jazidas. / Brazilian’s territory mineral deposits are public goods. Its exploitation it’s taken by private capitals, which pays the state royalties in compensation. This institutional arrangement, however, was founded by 1988’s Constitution and it is a synthesis of an evolution on the state-mineral deposits relation as it is understood by the Law, in whose origins the deposits used to belong to the territorial private owner. This legal understanding remains, however, incomplete, and, so far, self-contradictory, since the mineral deposits exploitation and the terms that regulate royalties payment prevent state autonomy in the face of its goods and underestimate the value of its compensation. This text purposes different kind of interpretations to the Financial Compensation by the Exploitation of Mineral Resources (CFEM) in order to demonstrate state’s undervalued royalties. As ground-rent, CFEM fails to capture differential and absolute rents, providing them in a minor portion. As a public property protection price, which exploitation provides negative externalities in disrespect to the sustainability criterion, CFEM, again, fails. At last, this text demonstrates that the commodities market mystifies its original root of value. It is proposed the institutional arrangement to be overcomed in a sudden movement or by smaller legal changes that provides the state a bigger income and exploitation primacy.

The World Wide Web (Web) has evolved from a collection of static pages that need reloading every time the content changes, into dynamic pages where parts of the page updates independently, without reloading it. As such, users are required to work with dynamic pages with components that react to events either from human interaction or machine automation. Often elderly and visually impaired users are the most disadvantaged when dealing with this form of interaction. Operating widgets require the user to have the conceptual design knowledge of the widget to complete the task. Users must have prior experience with the widget or have to learn to operate it independently, because often no user documentation is available. An automated Widget Prediction Framework (WPF) is proposed to address the issues discussed. It is a pre-emptive approach that predicts different types of widget and their locations in the page. Widgets with similar characteristics and functionalities are categorised based on a definition provided by widget design pattern libraries. Some design patterns are more loosely defined than others, and this causes confusion and ambiguity when identifying them. A formal method to model widgets based on a Widget Ontology was developed. The paradigm of the ontology provides a framework for developers to communicate their ideas, while reducing ambiguity between different types of widget. A Widget Prediction System (WPS) was developed using the concepts of the WPF. To select the types of widget for WPS evaluation, a widget popularity investigation was conducted. Seven of the most popular widgets from the investigation, done across fifty Websites, were selected. To demonstrate how WPF can be applied to predict widgets, fifty websites were used to evaluate the feasibility of the approach using WPS. On average, WPS achieved 61.98% prediction accuracy with two of the widgets > 84% accuracy. These results demonstrated the feasibility of the framework as the backend for tools that support elderly or visually impaired users.

Fruit de négociations longues et ardues, la Convention des Nations Unies sur le droit de la mer signée en 1982 est sans doute l’un des traités multilatéraux les plus réussis sur le plan international. Pierre angulaire de la Convention, l’attribution du statut de « patrimoine commun de l’humanité » aux fonds marins et leur sous-sol situés au-delà des limites de la juridiction nationale ainsi qu’à leurs ressources a constitué une innovation majeure dans le domaine du droit international. Le succès de la Convention tient notamment au fait qu’elle a établi un cadre institutionnel sans précédent chargé de la mise en œuvre de la Convention et incarné par trois institutions : l’Autorité internationale des fonds marins, la Commission des limites du plateau continental et le Tribunal international du droit de la mer. Dotées de statuts juridiques divers et de compétences différentes, ces institutions fonctionnent depuis l’entrée en vigueur de la Convention en 1994. Vingt-et-un ans après sa fondation, il convient d’examiner ce cadre institutionnel dans son ensemble et d’évaluer sa mise en œuvre pour mieux comprendre le rôle complémentaire des institutions. Cette étude porte un regard critique sur la genèse, la nature, le fonctionnement et la pratique des institutions, et s’attache à les considérer dans leur interaction et leur interdépendance. Identifier les insuffisances institutionnelles et interinstitutionnelles, ainsi que les défis auxquels les institutions sont confrontées est un préalable indispensable à la recherche de solutions efficaces et viables pour surmonter les difficultés rencontrées, à la mise en œuvre harmonieuse de la Convention et à la concrétisation du concept fondamental de patrimoine commun de l’humanité. Dans cette perspective, l’importance du Tribunal dans son rôle de garant de l’intégrité de la Convention et le pouvoir créateur du juge international face aux lacunes conventionnelles méritent une attention toute particulière. / The result of protracted and arduous negotiations, the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seasigned in 1982 is undoubtedly one of the most successful multilateral treaties at the international level. The principle of the common heritage of mankind, represented by the seabed, ocean floor and subsoil and their resources beyond the limits of national jurisdiction, is the cornerstone of the Convention and constituted a major innovation in international law. The success of the Convention lies, in particular, in the establishment of an unprecedented institutional framework, which is incarnated by three institutions: the International Seabed Authority, the Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. These institutions of diverse legal status are vested with different functions and have been in operation since the entry into force of the Convention in 1994. Twentyone years following its establishment, it is necessary to review this institutional framework as a whole and to assess its implementation in order to better understand the complementary role of the institutions. This study critically examines the genesis, the nature, the functioning and the practice of the institutions throughtheir interaction and their interdependence. Identifying institutional and inter-institutional weaknesses, and the challenges that the institutions face is an indispensable prerequisite for ensuring effective and viablesolutions, the harmonious implementation of the Convention and for giving substance to the principle ofthe common heritage of mankind. In this context, the role of the Tribunal as the guarantor of the integrityof the Convention and the creative power of the international judge merit special attention.