MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2012122451 · doi:10.5539/jsd.v2n3p43

Regional analysis: Differences in emission-intensity due to differences in economic structure or environmental efficiency?

2009· article· en· W2012122451 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maarten van Rossum, Marije Van de Grift

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sustainable Development · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economic and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater Framework DirectiveDirectiveEmission intensityStructural basinWater qualityDrainage basinEnvironmental scienceQuality (philosophy)Environmental qualityIntensity (physics)PollutionNatural resource economicsWater resource managementBusinessEnvironmental resource managementEconomicsGeographyComputer scienceEcologyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The economy is a complex system with many aspects having different interrelated dimensions. Many of these different aspects of the economy may have consequences for the quality of water. Therefore a clear but complex link exists between the economy and the quality of water. This relationship is currently an important issue in estimating the costs of implementing the Water Framework Directive. There are many mechanisms by which the Water Framework Directive affects water quality and the economy. The Water Framework Directive sets water quality targets at river basin level. This is partly explained by the fact that water pollution is very much a local environmental problem. Between river basins large differences in emissions to water and economic activity exist. As a result, the emission-intensity, here defined as the ratio between emissions and value added, differs between river basins. This paper tries to give an answer to why there are differences in emission-intensity between river basins in The Netherlands. In doing so, we will focus on differences in economic structure and environmental efficiency.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.002
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 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

Citations3
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicRegional Economic and Spatial AnalysisFrench-language works237,207