Peace Engineering in Practice: China’s Energy Diplomacy Strategy and Its Global Implications
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the world’s largest energy importer, consumer and with the second-largest economy, China is heavily dependent on fossil fuels. Massive energy imports make China a major stakeholder in the world energy trade, with significant implications and repercussions on the global economy. The desire to be energy independent and the environmental impact of fossil fuels is prompting China to diversify its energy supply, adapt its domestic energy infrastructure, and deploy renewable energy technologies on an unprecedented scale. Intending to position itself internationally, China has developed an energy diplomacy strategy while formulating international relations policies. In particular, the government emphasizes sustainable development through the large-scale deployment of renewable energy technologies, which will help build Western China while simultaneously reducing pollution across the country, elevating China to a position of global leadership in the energy sector. Intellectual property and technological capabilities developed in China can be exported worldwide, including in the regions where the population has limited or no access to energy. In addition, this strategy will have worldwide implications as it will directly or indirectly help achieve several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), including clean energy, education, eradicating poverty, climate action and sustainable cities and communities. On this basis, we anticipate that China’s energy policies may have long-lasting prospects for global peace, thus constituting an interesting and relevant case study for the emerging concept of “peace engineering.”
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".