MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2030178805 · doi:10.1080/00207230108711342

Environmental economics and ecological economics: antagonistic approaches?

2001· article· en· W2030178805 on OpenAlex
Frank G. Müller

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Environmental Studies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicClimate Change Policy and Economics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMonetizationEcological economicsEconomicsEcologyEcological systems theoryMethodological individualismEnvironmental economicsNeoclassical economicsSustainabilityMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Environment al economics, based on neoclassical methodology, cannot sufficiently describe and explain economic‐ecological interactions because of its theoretical framework. Methodological individualism, materially ignorant circulation‐theory, the tendency towards quantification and monetization, and an “unhistoric” idea of time, prevent economists from realizing irreversible and dynamic developments of complex systems, like ecosystems. Ecological methodology with its systemic and evolutionary approach, combined with a holistic perception of spaces, leads to a more realistic view of economic‐ecological interactions and provides guidelines for environmental policy, quite different to those proposed by conventional environmental economics. In short, protection of the environment by internalization into ecological and not into the economic system.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score0.851

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.141
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.115 · 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