MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405721139 · doi:10.1086/733652

The Economics and Governance of Solar Geoengineering

2024· article· en· W4405721139 on OpenAlexaff
Juan Moreno‐Cruz, David M. McEvoy, Matthew McGinty, Todd L. Cherry

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of Environmental Economics and Policy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Geoengineering
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeoengineeringCorporate governanceEconomicsEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental economicsNatural resource economicsClimate changeFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Limited progress on reducing global greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions has sparked increasing interest in whether the global community should consider the use of solar geoengineering (SGE)—technologies designed to reflect sunlight away from Earth—as a short-term approach to reduce climate change damages. Through theory, surveys, simulations, and experiments, economists have studied the strategic implications of SGE, how these technologies interact with incentives to mitigate GHG emissions, and the challenges of governing them. This article provides a comprehensive review of the literature, starting with how SGE is incorporated into economic models. One issue is whether SGE will crowd out efforts to mitigate GHG or will enhance mitigation efforts. We identify conditions under which each of those results is likely. We review the economics of governing SGE, particularly the issue of a single actor unilaterally deploying SGE to manipulate global temperatures. Our review synthesizes the main findings from the literature with the goal of better informing global climate policies.

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.001
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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReview of Environmental Economics and PolicySame topicClimate Change and GeoengineeringFrench-language works237,207