The Kyoto protocol in a global perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The global climate has changed notably since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution. Atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gasses (GHG) have increased dramatically followed by an increase in global average temperature. In order to avoid negative potential outcomes of global warming, countries have adopted the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change that has so far been ratified by 192 countries. In 1997 the Kyoto Protocol, a binding GHG reduction plan, was adopted and entered into force in 2005. But several countries, including the USA, have had doubts about the potential negative consequences of the planned 5% global joint reduction of GHG. However, studies generally show that on a macroeconomic level: (1) welfare loss in terms of GDP and lost growth in EU is low; (2) it differs among economies; and (3) permit trading and permit price (in either global or regional markets) is highly correlated with the welfare loss. The main objective of the paper is to describe the attitudes and responses to the Kyoto Protocol from a global perspective. The paper has three objectives. First, to provide an overview of global greenhouse gas emissions and the big drivers behind these emissions. Second, to present where different countries, both developed and less developed countries, such as India, China and the countries of South-east Europe currently stand as regards their efforts to achieve the Kyoto Protocol requirements. Third, to analyse the responses and attitudes to the Kyoto Protocol from a country development perspective.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.004 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".