MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7084671977 · doi:10.5281/zenodo.17272123

Carbon Taxation in India: A Policy Feasibility Study

2025· article· en· W7084671977 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicElectric Power System Optimization
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCarbon taxEnforcementGovernment (linguistics)RevenueGreenhouse gasOrder (exchange)Tax revenueBaseline (sea)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Climate change is a pressing challenge facing 21st-century policymakers, with India facing severe consequences due to its geographical diversity. Rising emissions, coupled with increasing economic inequality, make it crucial to identify policy instruments that can both reduce pollution and support sustainable growth. One such instrument is the carbon tax, which has been implemented in several countries to curb emissions while raising government revenue. The paper examines the case study of Canada and the EU, to analyse the effectiveness of carbon tax. Drawing on these lessons, this study suggests a phased strategy for enacting a carbon tax in India and highlights potential economic barriers like inflation, industry resistance, and enforcement problems. This study suggests an initial tax rate of $10 per tonne of CO2 emissions for India. The study also notes that the rate should be viewed as a baseline for phased implementation, open to future adjustments based on performance. In order to guarantee that the tax is both practical and politically feasible, it highlights the necessity of revenue redistribution, public awareness initiatives, and specific exemptions for industries that are particularly vulnerable. By tailoring global lessons to India’s unique economic and political context, this paper bridges an important gap in the literature. Hence, a well-structured carbon tax could be a major contributor to India’s progress to a net-zero future.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.531
Threshold uncertainty score0.584

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueZenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research)Same topicElectric Power System OptimizationFrench-language works237,207