Notice bibliographique
Résumé
This interdisciplinary conference was exceptional in that the papers were individually excellent, and there was a thread weaving through many of the papers, especially those presented by ecological economists, concerning the inadequacy of neo-classical economics to analyze and provide solutions to environmental problems, that was related to my presentation. Although I am a philosopher, not an economist, I work in the applied ethics field of environmental ethics, and the thesis of my paper was that the requirement by the Canadian federal government that recommendations from Health Canada and Environment Canada to Cabinet and the Treasury Board for regulating toxic chemicals be supported with cost-benefit analyses undermines the application of the ethical principles that ground the Canadian Environmental Protection Act (1999). I presented the paper to try out my ideas in preparation for my sabbatical, during which I will attempt to deepen the analysis and strengthen the paper. \n \nAs at many conferences, the time allotted for discussion was very short, and I had to work hard to glean ideas for improvement from the questions and comments received. The paper was well received (one person suggest that I start a blog similar to Don Brown’s on ethical aspects of climate change). However, I realized that my argument to show that cost-benefit analysis would work against the principle of pollution prevention was weak. One of the comments helped me to realize that I could strengthen it by discussing the assumptions behind the practice of calculating in monetary terms the benefit of saving a human life in order to show that the benefit of reducing, for example, a certain number of cancer deaths is not outweighed by the cost to industry. Also, of course, I am not an expert in cost-benefit analysis, and I learned from two comments how to state the implications of the practice of discounting for intergenerational equity more accurately. \n \nI plan to revise this paper and submit it for publication. It is part of a broader study of Canada’s Chemicals Management Plan, which will bring in problems with risk assessment as well as risk management. The broader study will also place more emphasis on a comparative approach than I was able to in this presentation.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».