MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2943249112 · doi:10.1111/cars.12244

Canadian Fossil Capitalism, Corporate Strategy, and Post‐Carbon Futures

2019· article· en· W2943249112 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nicolas Graham

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologie · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicGlobal Energy and Sustainability Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFossil fuelRenewable energyFutures contractCapitalismMarket economyCoalNatural resource economicsBusinessEnergy transitionCapital (architecture)Energy sectorEconomic systemClimate changeEconomicsEconomyPoliticsPolitical scienceEcologyFinanceGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study investigates the relationship between the carbon extractive sector in Canada and renewable energy development. Specifically, it examines the strategies employed by Canadian carbon-capital firms to shape and control alternative energy and considers if we are witnessing signs of "transition capture" as some oil, gas, and coal firms invest in a gradual shift toward "climate capitalism." I investigate first, investments by large Canada-based fossil fuel companies in renewable energy and second, interlocking directorate relations between the fossil fuel sector and the renewables industry. Findings suggest the possibility of a long-term strategic orientation toward a climate capitalist model of development by some carbon-capital firms; however, this alignment remains highly tentative, with evidence pointing to an industry that is largely without plans for energy transition.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.073
Threshold uncertainty score0.533

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.227 · 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 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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Review of Sociology/Revue canadienne de sociologieSame topicGlobal Energy and Sustainability ResearchFrench-language works237,207