MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2476994262 · doi:10.1111/ropr.12183

Trade and Industrial Policy as Levers for Sustainable Energy Technology Adoption? Experiences from Urban<scp>L</scp>atin<scp>A</scp>merica

2016· article· en· W2476994262 on OpenAlexaff
Alexandra Mallett

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Policy Research · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicSustainability and Climate Change Governance
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
FundersLondon School of Economics and Political Science
KeywordsSustainable energyBusinessEmpirical evidenceEnergy (signal processing)Clean energyEconomicsIndustrial organizationEnvironmental economicsRenewable energyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Debates abound regarding the link between trade and industrial policy and the adoption of sustainable energy technologies in developing countries. Some purport that open trade regimes support technology diffusion, while others indicate that more interventionist regimes are more conducive. This paper uses empirical evidence from Mexico City and São Paulo to argue that sustainable energy technology uptake can be more prevalent in settings with partially open trade policy regimes. These regimes have afforded countries more opportunities to develop local capabilities, which, in turn, has had knock‐on effects on sustainable energy technology uptake. Specifically, having more local technology sources (equipment, expertise) brought quicker access to these technologies, created more perceptions of technology “ownership,” fostered more effective mobilization, and helped create well‐established standards, which in turn contributed positively to sustainable energy technology uptake, while taxes and tariffs were less influential.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.062
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.302 · 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 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 venueReview of Policy ResearchSame topicSustainability and Climate Change GovernanceFrench-language works237,207