MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Consumers and Intermediate Producers in the Phase-out of Agricultural and Industrial Ozone-Depleting Substances

2017· book· en· W4252545749 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Alexander Ovodenko

Bibliographic record

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2017
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMontreal ProtocolAgricultureBusinessProduct (mathematics)Competition (biology)Downstream (manufacturing)Ozone layerIndustrial organizationOzoneChemistryGeographyEcologyMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The chapter analyzes the impact of downstream consumer markets on environmental regime design by explaining why wealthy countries have successfully phased out industrial ozone-depleting substances (ODS) but not an agricultural pesticide known as methyl bromide under the Montreal Protocol, despite the 2005 phase-out deadline for that pesticide. Since the analysis focuses on the regulation of different sectors under the same treaty, it isolates the impact of markets without the threat of major confounding variables interfering with the conclusions. It emphasizes competitive pressures and the structure of intermediate producers in the industrial and agricultural markets employing ODS to explain why methyl bromide has been handled differently from industrial refrigerants. The findings illustrate the impacts of consumer preferences and market competition on the investments of fluoro-product companies and, in turn, on the policies of wealthy countries and rules in the ozone regime.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.124 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOxford University Press eBooks→Same topicClimate Change Policy and Economics→French-language works237,207→