Taiwan's Voluntary Compliance with the International Climate Regime: Adaptation or Learning?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In 2006, the Taiwan cabinet submitted the draft bill of the “Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act” to the Legislative Yuan. This action marks an important progress in Taiwan’s compliance with the international climate regime. After assuming office in May 2008, the newly elected president, Ma Ying-jeou, also actively advocates the “save energy and reduce carbon emissions” policy. Since Taiwan is not a signatory of the Kyoto Protocol, its willingness to comply with the carbon emissions reduction requirements poses an interesting theoretical question for students of international relations: does Taiwan’s voluntary compliance reflect its learning from the international climate norm, or merely a tactical adaptation to it? By carefully analyzing the development of Taiwan’s climate change policy and the drafting and deliberation process of the “Greenhouse Gas Reduction Act,” this paper demonstrates that Taiwan’s climate policy to a great extent is driven by the fear of being punished by the international society.Its overarching goal is still the belief that economic development should be the primary consideration. This finding suggests that Taiwan’s isolation from both the UNFCCC and the Kyoto Protocol has prohibited it from being socialized into their norm of climate change mitigation through intensive interaction.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".