MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413049464 · doi:10.1088/2515-7620/adf8ad

Incorporating social indicators for an equitable carbon budget allocation among different geographical regions

2025· article· en· W4413049464 on OpenAlexaff
Syeda Tasnia Hasan, Michael O. Wood, Horatiu A. Rus, Simron Jit Singh, Tingting Wu

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Research Communications · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WaterlooEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon fibersGeographyEnvironmental scienceEconomic geographyRegional scienceEnvironmental resource managementComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As the global temperature continues to rise each year, limiting global warming to 1.5 °C is increasingly becoming a challenge due to the shrinking size of the remaining carbon budget. Under the Paris Agreement, countries committed to reducing their emissions based on national circumstances and priorities. Current emission reduction approaches account for past emissions, per capita emissions, ability to pay for mitigation, and other factors. Based on these factors, researchers have recommended various ways, such as the blended approach, for allocating the remaining carbon budget. However, it does not fully account for the social conditions that play a vital role in allocating the remaining carbon budget. In response, this research formulates a way to equitably allocate the remaining carbon budget among different geographical regions based on their social conditions. It incorporates critical social indicators based on the Doughnut framework to the Contraction and Convergence (C&C) principle, a commonly used allocation mechanism in climate policy, to determine equitable carbon budget shares at the national and regional levels. The share is obtained based on the proportion of current emissions associated with social performance and the proportion of the present population for 158 countries, which are grouped into 12 geographical regions. According to the equitable allocation mechanism, regions with poor social scores are assigned greater carbon budgets and vice versa. That is, countries and regions experiencing large shortfalls in their social foundation (e.g., frequent food famine) are allowed to burn more CO 2 to enable food security and rapid industrialization. Thus, this study addresses the challenges of addressing equity issues in carbon emission reduction necessary to achieve the temperature targets outlined in the Paris Agreement by introducing a robust method to account for a country’s socio-economic circumstances for an equitable allocation of the remaining carbon budget. Moreover, it establishes a reasonable benchmark for regional decision-making on climate action for countries vulnerable to climate change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
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 head0.185
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.182 · 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.

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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironmental Research CommunicationsSame topicClimate Change Policy and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207