Will the Price Ever be Right? Carbon Pricing and the WTO
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the creation of the GATT and later WTO, the global trade governance system has served multiple related purposes – the reduction of tariffs and other trade barriers, the creation of norms around international trade, and dispute resolution. Climate change provides an opportunity to extend the role of norms in global trade governance, because of the central role that carbon pricing plays in reducing emissions. For carbon pricing to be effective and not lead to a “race to the bottom”, it has to be applied across all trading countries at a similar level. We show that a system of carbon taxes and border carbon adjustments (BCAs) that equalizes the price of carbon across all traded goods and services is compatible with the letter and practice of the WTO. In fact, given the inherently global nature of climate change, such a system will only function if it is centered within the multilateral trading system. Thus a global institution is used for the purpose global institutions are created for – enabling the production of a global public good, a cleaner environment.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".