MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6949861818 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.2595506

Canada's Fair Share of 1.5 °C-Consistent Global Mitigation Through 2035

2024· article· en· W6949861818 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobal warmingClimate change mitigationWork (physics)Position (finance)LimitingClimate FinanceClimate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This technical report serves to outline the methodological and normative-ethical choices taken by members of Climate Action Network Canada – Réseau action climat Canada (CAN-Rac) in deriving their current position on Canada’s fair share through 2035 towards a global mitigation effort consistent with limiting warming to 1.5 °C, based on the findings of the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (IPCC AR6). It also outlines the methodology applied and the results obtained. Their work concluded that Canada’s total fair share of a 1.5 °C-consistent global mitigation effort is equivalent to a 160 % reduction in emissions below 2005 levels by 2035, when accounting for Canada’s shortfall over the post-Paris period 2016-2023 between its actual emissions and its previously calculated fair share (a total shortfall of 1,180 MtCO2eq). Utilizing the analysis of the International Energy Agency’s Net Zero Emission scenario, implies a domestic reduction of 73 % below 2005 levels in 2035. Applying a portion of Canada’s post-Paris shortfall to this figure increases it to a total domestic reduction of 80% below 2005 levels in 2035. The gap between the 160 % total fair share and the 80 % domestic portion constitutes the international portion of Canada’s total mitigation fair share. Expressed as climate finance contribution for mitigation, the international portion of Canada’s fair share implies, in 2025, an annual total public climate finance contribution for mitigation of USD $ 19 billion (CAD $ 25bn). This amount increases to USD $ 64 billion (CAD $ 86bn) per year by 2035, for an average of USD $ 43 billion (CAD $ 58bn) per year during the 2025-2035 period. If the ratio between Canada's bilateral public climate finance and its attributed multilateral climate finance for mitigation remains constant and matches the 2016-2020 average for OECD donors, the bilateral public climate finance portion of this total would be USD $ 9 billion (CAD $ 12 bn) annually in 2025, increasing to USD $ 28 billion (CAD $ 38 bn) per year by 2035, averaging USD $ 20 billion (CAD $ 27 bn) per year over this period.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.952
Threshold uncertainty score0.348

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)→Same topicCanadian Policy and Governance→French-language works237,207→