MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3123679858

The Impact of Carbon Tax on Food Prices and Consumption in Canada

2018· article· en· W3123679858 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tom Wu, Paul J. Thomassin

Bibliographic record

Venue2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British Columbia · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon taxConsumption (sociology)Food pricesAgricultural economicsFood securityEconomicsAgricultureFood consumptionConsumption taxNatural resource economicsBusinessGreenhouse gasMonetary economicsTax reformPublic economicsIndirect taxGeographyEcology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study analyzed the impact of a carbon tax on food prices and consumption patterns in Canada. The findings suggest that a carbon tax has negative impacts on both food prices and food consumption patterns in Canada. The magnitude of the impact depends on whether agriculture sectors are exempt from the carbon tax. When these sectors are exempt, the negative impacts of a carbon tax on food prices and food consumption patterns are small. A multi-regional price model was constructed to analyze the impact of the carbon tax by region. Specifically, this study compared the changes in food prices and food consumption patterns among different provinces in Canada. The results showed that food prices in Quebec are the most affected, followed by Alberta. In addition, there was no evidence that the impact of a carbon tax on the food consumption patterns would vary by income group. These results shed light on the impact of carbon taxes on food security and affordability in Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.074
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.185 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue2018 Conference, July 28-August 2, 2018, Vancouver, British ColumbiaSame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207