MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416384873 · doi:10.1111/risa.70152

Climate Mitigation Innovations From National Legislation Under Risk Conditions

2025· article· en· W4416384873 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ying Liu, Chao Feng

Bibliographic record

VenueRisk Analysis · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersNational Social Science Fund of ChinaFundamental Research Funds for the Central UniversitiesFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsLegislationRisk managementClimate changeLegislatureClimate change mitigationPolitical riskDeveloping countryGlobe

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Most nations across the globe have already embraced climate legislation to tackle the challenge of climate change. This article considers the role of country risk (i.e., economic risk, financial risk, political risk, and climate physical risk) in affecting the relationship between climate mitigation legislation (CML) on climate mitigation innovations (CMIs) using a panel of 130 countries from 1995 to 2022. The findings show that CML generally promotes CMI. However, moderating effects reveal that country risk can weaken the positive impacts of CML on CMI, underscoring the importance of integrating risk management into legislative frameworks to drive CMI. Asymmetry checks show that the direct and moderating effects are more pronounced in countries with greater CMI, suggesting that greater CMI requires stronger risk mitigation. Heterogeneity analysis reveals the moderating effect of risks on the impact of CML on CMI differs significantly between developed and developing countries, with developing countries facing a more urgent need for climate risk management.

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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.243
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRisk AnalysisSame topicRegulation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207