Sustainability and the Olympics: the case of Athens 2004
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While economy and ecology ought to share the same values and targets, as their common 'eco' prefi x indicates, reality tends to be somehow different. Economic growth and environmental protection seem to be noncompatible, both in methods and in results. In many cases, for example, investments trigger actions that operate competitively to the wealth of the environment, while the strict application of environmental directives often results in halting development. Moreover, the tendency towards constant economic growth is a desirable and inherent characteristic of human nature, which is apparently not to be changed in the near future. In this context, the need for a bundle of approaches that could tie the objectives of economic growth and environmental protection, namely to maximize the total social wealth, arises as pressing and this need has fi nally led to the birth of the fi elds of sustainable development and environmental economics. As a result, the compatibility testing of each investment project with the standards and principles settled by sustainable development is a matter of concern. Following the call for sustainability, this paper is among the fi rst to address both the economic and environmental impact of the biggest of events globally, the Olympics. Focusing on the Games of Athens 2004, the text describes a framework of Olympic impact assessment, in terms of properly shaped sustainable performance indicators. Data and facts concerning the total budget of the Games are presented, while the evolution of the Games' economic context is monitored through the volume of labour force, unemployment rate and energy consumption. The sustainability and environmental impact is also assessed, mainly through the areas of interest of transport networks and pollution, among others. Eventually, the paper demonstrates a holistic approach towards assessing the sustainable impact of the Olympic Games, in term of its implementation in the Athens 2004 case.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".