MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051557927 · doi:10.1163/187601006x00155

World Trade Law and Renewable Energy: : the Case of Non-tariff Measures

2006· article· en· W2051557927 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Robert Howse

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for European Environmental & Planning Law · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUnbundlingFutures contractTariffRenewable energyElectricityBusinessInternational lawEconomicsInternational tradeEnergy lawInternational economicsEnvironmental lawIndustrial organizationLawFinancePolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Over the last two decades, trade and environment issues have typically been a source of intense controversy and conflict in the world trading system. Renewable energy, however, represents an area where we believe that freer less-distorted trade and environmental protection have the potential to be mutually reinforcing. Historically, electrical energy itself has not been traded across borders, with some exceptions (Canada and the US and in the EU). However, with the de-monopolisation of electricity in an increasing number of jurisdictions, and the unbundling of functions such as generation, grid operation, transmission, and retailing as well as the development of financial instruments such as futures and options contracts for energy, the structure of the entire market is starting to change, complicating the analysis under WTO law. This article aims to raise questions and suggest areas where domestic and international policymakers may need to consider undertaking further analysis.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.013
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0130.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.018
Scholarly communication0.0140.011
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0180.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.231 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations13
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for European Environmental & Planning LawSame topicWorld Trade Organization LawFrench-language works237,207