MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4235038202 · doi:10.1515/energyo.0008.00007

Green Jobs and Renewable Electricity Policies: Employment Impacts of Ontario’s Feed-in TariffThe authors thank two anonymous referees for helpful comments. The CGE model in use for the quantitative analysis was developed with funding by Environment Canada. The ideas expressed here are those of the authors who remain solely responsible for errors and omissions.

2018· dataset· en· W4235038202 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Christoph Böhringer, Thomas F. Rutherford, Nicholas Rivers, Randall Wigle

Bibliographic record

Venueenergyo · 2018
Typedataset
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputable general equilibriumRenewable energyElectricityEconomicsEnvironmental economicsNatural resource economicsAgricultural economicsOperations researchEngineeringMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Policy makers justify renewable energy promotion policies partly on the grounds that such policies have positive employment impacts. We apply a computable general equilibrium model to assess the labour market impacts of the feed-in tariff policy used by the Government of Ontario. We find that although the policy is successful at increasing the employment in the `green' sectors of the economy, the policy is also likely to increase the rate of unemployment in the province, and to reduce overall labour force participation. We conclude that policies designed to promote renewable energy should be promoted for the sake of their environmental impacts, not for their labour market effects.

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)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Dataset · Consensus signal: Dataset
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.149

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.011
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.005

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.260 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreDataset

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 venueenergyoSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207