MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2819848120 · doi:10.1177/0973801018768974

Environmental Fiscal Instruments: A Few International Experiences

2018· article· en· W2819848120 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Rajat Verma

Bibliographic record

VenueMargin The Journal of Applied Economic Research · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)RevenuePerspective (graphical)Environmental taxTax revenueEconomicsPublic economicsDevelopment economicsBusinessGeographyFinanceTax reform

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article attempts to document the status of environmental fiscal instruments (EFIs) so as to explore relevant international experiences on ecotaxes in the context of India and to examine India’s specificities in these taxes within a wider perspective of other fiscal measures. Environmental levies across 15 countries were reviewed and the countries categorised are into two groups: Annex II and Non-Annex I. The revenues from levies imposed in the countries were also analysed. The most common form of taxes in Annex II countries in the form of energy taxes, followed by transport taxes. For India, energy and transport taxes could prove to be vital types of ecotaxes for addressing issues of climate change. Pollution taxes are difficult to levy for administrative reasons, but resource taxes are imperative because of severe environmental problems associated with mining and related activities. The revenue generated from environmental taxes and charges for all Annex II countries hovered between 2 and 4 per cent of their respective GDPs, except for Canada and the United States of America, whereas for Non-Annex I nations, this ranged only between 0 and 1 per cent. JEL Classification: H23, Q50, Q58

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.523
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.003

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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.333
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMargin The Journal of Applied Economic ResearchSame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207