MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406254516 · doi:10.61797/ijbfit.v2i1.390

Decarbonization of Indian Banking: Challenges & Pathways Forward

2024· article· en· W4406254516 on OpenAlexaff
Janardhana Anjanappa

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Banking Finance and Insurance Technologies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicSustainable Finance and Green Bonds
Canadian institutionsCrown Investments Corporation (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsContext (archaeology)SustainabilityNoveltyBusinessInvestment (military)Industrial organizationPolitical scienceGeographyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the challenges for decarbonizing the Indian banking sector, a critical step in India's commitment to the Paris Agreement. The objective is to assess the current status of decarbonization, identify key challenges, and propose strategic solutions to facilitate sustainable banking practices. In this context, the research employs a qualitative approach, analyzing secondary data from literature, policy documents, and industry reports. The novelty of the research lies in its comprehensive assessment of the multifaceted challenges financial, regulatory, technological, and socio-cultural specific to the Indian context. It provides a nuanced understanding of the sector's progress and the barriers it faces, which is crucial for policymakers and banking institutions. The findings reveal a mixed landscape of decarbonization efforts, with some banks successfully adopted sustainable banking practices, while others struggle with scaling and operational constraints. Key findings indicate that while some Indian banks have made strides in adopting green practics, the sector as a whole is hindered by high costs of green technologies, regulatory uncertainty, outdated technological systems, and a culture resistant to change. The study highlights the need for clear policies, investment in technology upgradation, and a cultural shift towards sustainability within the banking sector.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.274
Threshold uncertainty score0.628

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Banking Finance and Insurance TechnologiesSame topicSustainable Finance and Green BondsFrench-language works237,207