MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385582221 · doi:10.1111/caje.12674

Carbon tax pass‐through in Canadian retail gasoline markets

2023· article· en· W4385582221 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Can Erutku, Vincent A. Hildebrand

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasExternalityGasolineCompetition (biology)Carbon taxHomogeneousNatural resource economicsEconomicsAgricultural economicsGovernment (linguistics)BusinessPublic economicsMicroeconomicsEcologyWaste management

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A carbon tax's pass‐through is one factor influencing its effectiveness in internalizing the externality created by greenhouse gas emissions. This paper measures the pass‐through of carbon taxes introduced in retail gasoline markets of four Canadian provinces that did not meet the carbon pollution pricing federal benchmark stringency requirements. Those four provinces are Saskatchewan, Manitoba, Ontario and New Brunswick. Using daily retail gasoline prices for 40 treated cities and nine control cities we find the pass‐through rates are city‐specific and vary from 0% to over 140%. City‐specific pass‐through rates imply that estimations at a higher level of geographical aggregation assume homogeneous effects where heterogeneous effects might be present. Our results also suggest it would be difficult for a government to impose an optimal and nationwide carbon tax on automotive greenhouse gas emissions. Although the degree of competition can explain city‐specific pass‐through rates, it cannot explain over‐shifting. Over‐shifting can be explained, however, by the demand functional form.

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)0.004
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 score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.136

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.185
Teacher spread0.108 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économiqueSame topicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesFrench-language works237,207