MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392845384 · doi:10.1080/21606544.2024.2325163

Costless CO <sub>2</sub> emissions abatement through improved government effectiveness

2024· article· en· W4392845384 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Woon Kan Yap, Farhana Roslan, Jenny Gryzelius, Dayana Elissa Mohammad Irman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Economics and Policy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnergy
TopicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNatural resource economicsGovernment (linguistics)EconomicsEnvironmental scienceGreenhouse gasEnvironmental economicsPublic economicsBusinessEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The withdrawal of Canada, Japan, New Zealand, and Russia from the Kyoto Protocol, the non-ratification of the United States at the onset, and the exemption given to China and India indicate that five out of the ten largest economies in the world, accounting for approximately 50% of the world GDP (as of 2021), have turned away from the Kyoto Protocol. This apprehension can plausibly be explained by the potential loss of productivity resulting from abatement of CO2 emissions. Therefore, this study examines the marginal effect of CO2 emission abatement on technical efficiency and how it can be moderated by government effectiveness. The following are the findings of this study: (1) inclusion of the pollution effect in the modelling of technical efficiency is necessary as it significantly changes the technical efficiency score ranking; (2) the opportunity cost of CO2 emissions abatement exists in the form of productivity loss but is significantly moderated by government effectiveness. These findings are important as they aid policymakers in mapping out a strategy for the desired costless abatement of 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.230 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Economics and PolicySame topicEnergy, Environment, and Transportation PoliciesFrench-language works237,207