MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2292096100 · doi:10.5539/jms.v6n1p121

The Effect of Ecological Elasticity in Taiwan’s Carbon Reduction Policies: The STIRPAT Model

2016· article· en· W2292096100 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Po‐Young Chu, Yuling Lin, Cyuan-Sian Guo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKyoto ProtocolGreenhouse gasPer capitaClimate changeEconomicsCarbon dioxideChristian ministryNatural resource economicsPrice elasticity of demandEnvironmental scienceEconometricsPopulationEcologyMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

<p>The challenges from the climate change and the global warming have become one of the most important issues to solve in the world. Under the Kyoto Protocol, countries which have signed the Kyoto Protocol have faced the pressure of reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The two main policies for reducing carbon dioxide are “carbon tax” and “carbon trading”. This research explores which policy will be more suitable for the society and economic environment of Taiwan. This research uses EIA database, the statistical data from the Taiwan Bureau of Energy, Ministry of Economic Affairs, and the data from AREMOS database from 1982 to 2010. The dependent variable is the emission of carbon dioxide, and the independent variables are premium diesel oil price index, population, GDP per capita and the squared term of GDP per capita. The research method is based on the Ordinary Least Squares to estimate the ecological elasticity in the STIRPAT model by analyzing the influence of the change of energy price to the change of the emission of carbon dioxide. From the empirical result, it was discovered that though the energy price and the emission of carbon dioxide was negatively correlated, the ecological elasticity was inelastic. As a result, carbon trading seems a more suitable policy for Taiwan.</p>

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.222

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207