aif version: AIF-Core-2011
mesh aif profile: 1.0
exported at: 2026-08-30T19:16:51.792Z
attestation:
  identifier: K3u0g1SE
  argument id: cmpvvmusg00288c99ln83argp
  permalink: https://www.isonomia.app/a/K3u0g1SE
  version: 1
  immutable permalink: https://www.isonomia.app/a/K3u0g1SE@c42132d45bfebd2a220a61ba7b7d915920a9bbd8086445bec4ebefe192fc9f0d
  iso id: iso:argument:K3u0g1SE
  iso url: https://www.isonomia.app/iso/argument/K3u0g1SE
  retrieved at: 2026-08-30T19:16:51.649Z
  created at: 2026-06-02T00:05:54.400Z
  updated at: 2026-06-02T00:05:54.400Z
  conclusion:
    claim id: cmpvvmoy9000w8c99beoa41ho
    text: If the payment were adopted and complied with, EU agricultural-peat emissions would fall substantially and the monetised benefits of restoration would exceed its costs.
  premises:
    claim id: cmpvvmoy9000x8c99gop1k06x
    text: The European Commission's own impact assessment values EU ecosystem-restoration benefits far above their cost, with climate benefits alone exceeding restoration costs.
    is implicit: false
  scheme:
    id: cmghcusvd000lzq6mf0qmkrnf
    key: negative_consequences
    name: Argument from Negative Consequences
    canonical key: negative_consequences
    catalogue health:
      is argument pattern: true
      is dialogue meta: false
      is test placeholder: false
      canonical key: negative_consequences
      cluster tag missing: false
      fingerprint materialised: true
  critical questions:
    scheme key: negative_consequences
    total: 3
    unanswered:
      cq key: NC.LIKELIHOOD
      text: Are the stated bad consequences likely to occur?
      attack kind: UNDERCUTS
      scheme key: negative_consequences
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: true
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
    unanswered:
      cq key: NC.MITIGATION
      text: Can the bad effects be mitigated so they are acceptable?
      attack kind: REBUTS
      scheme key: negative_consequences
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: true
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
    unanswered:
      cq key: NC.TRADEOFFS
      text: Are there benefits that outweigh the bad effects?
      attack kind: REBUTS
      scheme key: negative_consequences
      premise type: ORDINARY
      is scheme required: true
      inherited from parent scheme: false
      challenged: false
      challenge count: 0
      cq requires evidence: false
      cq burden: PROPONENT
      answer self canonical: true
      answer author kind: AI
      status: missing
  dialectical status:
    incoming attacks: 0
    incoming supports: 0
    incoming attack edges: 0
    critical questions required: 3
    critical questions answered: 0
    critical questions open: 3
    standing score: 0.5
    is tested: false
    testedness: untested
    standing state: untested-default
    standing depth:
      challengers: 0
      independent reviewers: 0
      confidence: thin
    fitness breakdown:
      total: 0
      weights:
        cq answered: 1
        support edges: 0.5
        attack edges: -0.7
        attack c as: -1
        evidence with provenance: 0.25
  deliberation: My Arguments
    id: cmp6823ov00008cbr3jjscs6o
  author:
    id: mcp-bot
    display name: Isonomia MCP Bot
    kind: AI
    ai provenance:
      via: mcp
      tool: propose_argument_chain
      created at: 2026-06-02T00:05:54.399Z
round trip soundness:
  scheme key: negative_consequences
  groups:
    ORDINARY:
      cq count: 3
      aif exposure: exposed
    ASSUMPTION:
      cq count: 0
      aif exposure: absent
    EXCEPTION:
      cq count: 0
      aif exposure: absent
  lossy: false

cmpvvmoy9000w8c99beoa41ho
type: InformationNode
text: If the payment were adopted and complied with, EU agricultural-peat emissions would fall substantially and the monetised benefits of restoration would exceed its costs.

cmpvvmoy9000x8c99gop1k06x
type: InformationNode
text: The European Commission's own impact assessment values EU ecosystem-restoration benefits far above their cost, with climate benefits alone exceeding restoration costs.

cmpvvmusg00288c99ln83argp
type: RA
type: negative consequences
uses scheme: negative_consequences
name: Argument from Negative Consequences
applies scheme key: negative_consequences

Premise
from: I:cmpvvmoy9000x8c99gop1k06x
to: S:cmpvvmusg00288c99ln83argp

Conclusion
from: S:cmpvvmusg00288c99ln83argp
to: I:cmpvvmoy9000w8c99beoa41ho

count: 0
weight: 1
contribution: 0

count: 0
weight: 0.5
contribution: 0

count: 0
weight: -0.7
contribution: 0

count: 0
weight: -1
contribution: 0

count: 0
weight: 0.25
contribution: 0