MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283511037 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v14n7p28

Is There a Relationship between CO2 Emissions by Sources, Electricity Consumption and Economic Growth in Côte d’Ivoire? Evidence from an ARDL Investigation

2022· article· en· W4283511037 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Felix Fofana N Zue

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPer capitaEconomicsCointegrationConsumption (sociology)Investment (military)Electric powerReal gross domestic productElectricityAgricultural economicsGross domestic productGranger causalityMacroeconomicsEconometricsPower (physics)PopulationDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the impact of different sources of CO2 emissions together with electric power consumption on per capita GDP in Côte d’Ivoire with data ranging from 1970 to 2019. We found cointegration relationships between per capita GDP and the variables of interest. CO2 emissions, CO2 emissions from liquid fuel consumption, electric power consumption and investment have positive impact on per capita GDP. A simultaneous increase of electric power consumption and CO2 emissions in the long run has a negative impact on per capita GDP. Causality runs from CO2 emissions, electric power consumption and investment to per capita GDP. In the short run, electric power consumption positively impacts per capita GDP. Labor force has a negative impact on per capita GDP. Causality runs from electric power consumption to per capita GDP. Similar results are obtained when CO2 emissions from liquid fuel consumption are used in place of global CO2 emissions.

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)0.003
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 score0.350
Threshold uncertainty score0.696

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.220 · 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

Citations1
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesFrench-language works237,207