MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2609279935

Acting on Climate Change: Solutions from 60 Canadian Scholars

2015· article· en· W2609279935 on OpenAlexaffabout
Catherine Potvin, Sébastien Jodoin

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasClimate changeSustainabilityPolitical scienceClimate change mitigationPosition (finance)Citizen journalismLow-carbon economyCorporate governanceEmissions tradingGlobal warmingEconomyPublic administrationBusinessEconomicsLawFinance
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2013, United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has been urging countries around the world to adopt ambitious climate change policies so as to avoid a global temperature increase of more than 2oC during this century. Answering this call, we formed the Sustainable Canada Dialogues, an initiative that mobilizes over 60 researchers from every province, working to identify a possible pathway to a low-carbon economy in Canada. Our position paper, Acting on Climate Change: Solutions from Canadian Scholars, launched in March 2015, identifies ten policy orientations illustrated by actions that could be immediately adopted to kick-start Canada’s necessary transition to a low-carbon economy and a sustainable society. Scholars from Sustainable Canada Dialogues unanimously recommend putting a price on carbon. Besides putting a price on carbon, Acting on Climate Change: Solutions from Canadian Scholars examines how Canada can reduce its greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) by (1) producing electricity with low-carbon-emissions sources; (2) modifying energy consumption through evolving urban design and transportation advancements; and (3) linking the transition to a low-carbon economy with a broader sustainability agenda, through the creation of participatory, well-coordinated, and open governance institutions that engage the Canadian public. Our proposals take into account Canada’s assets and are based on the well-accepted “polluter pays” principle.

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)0.025
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.026
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.215
Threshold uncertainty score0.911

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0250.026
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.010
Science and technology studies0.0640.033
Scholarly communication0.0220.007
Open science0.0040.017
Research integrity0.0140.015
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations10
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207