Australian Experience with ‘New’ Environmental Policy Instruments: The Greenhouse Challenge and Greenhouse Friendly Programs
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In association with international moves to address the impacts of global climate change some governments including those in the EU, US, Canada and Australia have taken steps to reduce greenhouse gas emissions via ‘new’ environmental policy instruments (NEPIs) (e.g. voluntary agreements, emissions trading and eco-labelling). This has been in response to the Framework Convention on Climate Change and in anticipation of the Kyoto Protocol coming into force. This paper focuses on Australian experience with two particular NEPIs: The Greenhouse Challenge and Greenhouse Friendly programs. Empirical evidence on the evolution and effectiveness of these programs is related to theoretical discussion on the role of NEPIs in industrial transformation, social learning and sustainability The success or effectiveness of these greenhouse NEPIs appears to be dependent on industry motivations and incentives for participation, the implementing agency's procedures and the design of the process for collaboration and information sharing between government and industry.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it