Green finance for soft power: An analysis of China's green policy signals and investments in the Belt and Road Initiative
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In this paper, I study why and how China uses green overseas finance in its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to build soft power. I apply Miskimmon et al.’s framework, which postulates that soft power is built on ‘signals' and ‘action’: I study eleven relevant Chinese BRI government and sector‐led signals in green BRI development and analyze Chinese green versus non‐green energy investments as actions. I find that Chinese regulators and financial institutions have provided multiple signals for greening finance in the BRI, while green finance action is insufficient with continued sponsoring of non‐green investments. The paper concludes that green finance is a tool for China to build soft power in the BRI, but it is applied insufficiently due to a lack of green finance action. The paper also finds that insufficient strength of soft power signals can lead to a dichotomy between soft power signals and action with possible negative consequences for soft power.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it