MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W622900872 · doi:10.1111/caje.12256

Endogenous growth with a limited fossil fuel extraction capacity

2017· article· en· W622900872 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gilbert Kollenbach

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économique · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicNatural Resources and Economic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEndowmentEconomicsConstraint (computer-aided design)Production (economics)Endogenous growth theoryConsumption (sociology)Capital (architecture)Natural resource economicsResource (disambiguation)MicroeconomicsCapacity utilizationIndustrial organizationMarket economyHuman capitalEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Campbell (1980) and following authors have discussed a limited resource extraction capacity as an augmentation of the well‐known Hotelling model. We integrate a limited extraction capacity and related investments in the endogenous growth model of Tsur and Zemel (2005) to study its effect on economic development. The capacity constraint gives rise to three effects. On the one hand, higher energy costs and the reallocation of production towards capacity investments decrease production available for consumption, research and/or capital investments (energy costs and reallocation effect). On the other hand, research investments may increase, which boosts available production (research effect). Depending on the capital endowment and the strength of the effects, long‐run consumption may be boosted or depressed. In particular, the capacity constraint may render everlasting consumption growth non‐optimal in a resource‐rich economy. Furthermore, we find that capacity investments may be postponed to later points in time if the capital endowment is high.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.214
GPT teacher head0.179
Teacher spread0.035 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d économiqueSame topicNatural Resources and Economic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207