Green Accounting of China: Comparison Analysis between 1992 and 1995/COMPTABILITE VERTE DE LA CHINE : ANALYSE COMPARATIVE ENTRE 1992 ET 1995
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: On the basis of the general framework of United Nations' accounting system-integrated system of environment & economy accounting SEEA (1992 /2000/2003) (UN, 1992/2000/2003) and 93'SNA (UN,1993), the specific objectives of this paper is try to construct one simple, effective and practical integrated system of environment & economy accounting of China (CSEEA), and thereby trial estimate of the 1992/1995 Chinese environmental adjusted GDP (Green GDP) is given, under Chinese National Accounting System's reform practice. Key words: SEEA, integrated system of environment & economy accounting of China, Green GDP, SNA Resume: Sur la base du cadre general du systeme de comptabilite « indirect/satellite » des Nations Unies-systeme integre de comptabilite environnementale et economique SEEA (1992 /2000/2003) (UN, 1992/2000/2003) et 93'SNA (UN,1993), l'objectif de l'article present consiste a construire un systeme integre de comptabilite environnementale et economique de Chine (CSEEA) simple, efficace et pratique. Ainsi, l'estimation du PIB vert de Chine 1992/1995 est donne, sous la reforme du Systeme de Comptabilite national de Chine. Mots-Cles: SEEA, systeme integre de comptabilite environnementale et economique de Chine, PIB, SNA 1. INTRODUCTION The discussion of integrated accounting for environment and economy under the framework of sustainable development has received increased attention by the international society, since the report of the World Commission on Environmental and Development was published in 1987. This heightening interest led to the proposal contained in Agenda 21 of the United Nations Conference on Environmental and Development (Rio de Janiero Earth Summit 1992) to encourage the development of integrated system environmental and economy accounting. In China, such proposal was also contained in the following Chinese Agenda 21 which was put forward in 1993. In 1993, United Nation revised its traditional 68'SNA and developed one general framework of integrated system environmental and economy accounting (SEEA) as a part of this revision. Till now, various components of the SEEA have been tested in case studies in the world. The work not only accumulated many good experience of construction of the concrete national SEEA but also demonstrate further that SEEA is an efficient system which can provide a valuable information base for integrated development and planning policy. According to that, revised versions of 1993'SEEA were put forwarded by UN in 2000 (UN, 2000) and 2003 (UN, 2003), respectively. Under this situation, it's doubtless an urgent and important task to develop a simple, effective and practical integrated system of environment & economy accounting of China (CSEEA), which is consistent with the Chinese SNA framework and capable of assessing the burden of economic activities on the natural resources and environment in China today. On the basis of the United Nation's General Framework of Integrated System Environ- mental and Economy Accounting (1992/2000/2003) (UN, 1992/2000/2003) and 93'SNA (UN, 1993) and Chinese National Accounting System's reform (1992/2002) practice (CNSB, 1992/2002), the specific objectives of this study is try to construct one simple, effective and practical integrated system of environment & economy accounting of China (CSEEA), and thereby estimate the 1992/1995 Chinese environmental adjusted GDP (Green GDP). This study is further research on the basis of our one former works on Green input-output accounting for natural resources-economy-environment (Lei, 1997/1999/2000/ 2003). All study is based on the marginal opportunity cost theory (Pearce, D.W. and A. Markandya, 1989) for natural resources pricing and Chinese National Accounting System's reform (CNSB, 1992/2002). 2. CHINESE INTEGRATED SYSTEM OF ENVIRONMENT-ECONOMY ACCOUNTING (CSEEA) In our CSEEA matrix, there are 27 rows which be divided into 7 parts (Opening Stocks (1 row), Use of Economy Natural Assets (8 rows), Supplies & Value Add (8 rows), Use of Non-Economy Natural Assets (5 rows), Green Value Add (1 row), Other Adjustments (3 rows) and Closing Stocks (1 row)) and 28 columns which be divided into 6 parts (Domestic Production (3 columns), Final Consumption (3 columns), Foreign Trade (3 columns), Economy Assets (14 columns), Non-Economy Assets (4 columns) and Total (1 column)). …
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".