{"id":"W130210185","doi":"10.1023/a:1024062803820","title":"Incorporating Natural Capital into Economy-Wide Impact Analysis: A Case Study from Alberta","year":2003,"lang":"en","type":"article","venue":"Environmental Monitoring and Assessment","topic":"Sustainable Development and Environmental Policy","field":"Environmental Science","cited_by":6,"is_retracted":false,"has_abstract":false,"ca_institutions":"University of Alberta; Canadian Forest Service","funders":"","keywords":"Computable general equilibrium; Economic impact analysis; Environmental impact assessment; Sustainability; Foothills; Economics; Natural resource economics; Economic model; Natural capital; Impact assessment; Environmental resource management; Environmental economics; Macroeconomics; Ecology; Ecosystem services","routes":{"ca_aff":true,"ca_fund":false,"ca_venue":false,"about_ca":true,"invisible_to_affiliation_only":false},"retraction":null,"screen":null,"direct_labels":[],"prediction":{"model_version":"metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061c","candidate_categories":[],"consensus_categories":[],"category_scores_codex":[0.001698677,0.0004114365,0.0003161613,0.0009818003,0.003267302,0.002590101,0.001227431,0.001097596,0.001795308],"category_scores_gemma":[0.002528669,0.0002131138,0.000319063,0.002730469,0.001209843,0.0009348116,0.001337918,0.0008053043,0.000106949],"about_ca_system_candidate":false,"about_ca_system_consensus":false,"about_ca_system_score_codex":0.01633058,"about_ca_system_score_gemma":0.01410715,"about_ca_topic_candidate":true,"about_ca_topic_consensus":true,"about_ca_topic_score_codex":0.8767233,"about_ca_topic_score_gemma":0.9589267,"domain_scores_codex":[0.9992251,0.0002877426,0.00002228518,0.00003924277,0.0001930133,0.0002326212],"domain_scores_gemma":[0.9986001,0.0007945369,0.00005706479,0.00008104542,0.0003277976,0.0001394381],"domain_codex":null,"domain_gemma":null,"domain_candidate":null,"domain_consensus":null,"study_design_codex":"simulation_or_modeling","study_design_gemma":"observational","study_design_scores_codex":[0.001331452,0.0009330143,0.1702639,0.0005073379,0.0003306021,0.01318522,0.01111869,0.462456,0.004753586,0.05187701,0.009676582,0.2735666],"study_design_scores_gemma":[0.0004331211,0.001019522,0.2329689,0.0004618049,0.001077743,0.002179048,0.08786643,0.4799336,0.01097392,0.05635886,0.1263492,0.0003779382],"study_design_candidate":"observational","study_design_consensus":null,"genre_codex":"empirical","genre_gemma":"empirical","genre_scores_codex":[0.9490393,0.0006025902,0.005570803,0.001505518,0.00001549876,0.000130988,0.0002538525,0.00007354562,0.04280787],"genre_scores_gemma":[0.9912241,0.0004814983,0.004247751,0.00006026163,0.000004505425,0.00001308317,0.00009288316,0.00001209318,0.003863901],"genre_candidate":"empirical","genre_consensus":"empirical","teacher_disagreement_score":0.1232767,"threshold_uncertainty_score":0.2480053,"prediction_status":"machine_predicted_unvalidated"},"machine_scores":{"provisional":true,"baseline":true,"maturity_gate_passed":false,"score_opus":0.00649387383624748,"score_gpt":0.2625121142096278,"score_spread":0.2560182403733803,"validation_status":"score_only:v0-immature-baseline","note":"Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed). Scores rank; they never assert a category."}}