MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095625994

Draft: 02.26.09 Direct and Indirect Effects of Voluntary Certification: Evidence from the Mexican Clean Industry Program

2014· article· en· W7095625994 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldDecision Sciences
Topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCertificateCertificationLatin AmericansChristian ministryAuditControl (management)TurnoverReceipt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

on Economic Growth. We wish to thank Naresh Kumar who processed and provided us with the satellite-based AOD measures for Mexico over the relevant period. We also with to thank Raul Tornel, Jaime Garcia Sepulveda, and Jose Domingo Morales of PROFEPA who provided us with the inspection and certification data and described in some detail the nature of their programs and the Mexican Ministry of Economics, which provided the firm-level data. We also thank seminar participants at Brown, Vanderbilt, University of Illinois, Guanajuato, ITAM, Université de Montréal and Banco de México for their comments and suggestions. All errors are ours. In this paper we develop a model of environmental regulation in a developing country that integrates firm and regulator behavior and incorporates a combination of voluntary and mandatory controls. The implications of this model are then tested using a data set that has been newly assembled to examine the effects of the Mexican Clean Industry Program, in which firms are provided a Clean Industry Certificate if they are willing to establish, via a privately financed audit that, they meet the legal emissions standards. In particular, by imposing some structure on the cost of participation and the cost of compliance and drawing out the resulting implications, we are able to establish using data at the

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.398

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.254 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicdemographic modeling and climate adaptationFrench-language works237,207