MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2168512526 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v5n12p121

Air Pollution, Economic Growth, and the European Union Enlargement

2013· article· en· W2168512526 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
İsmail Onur Baycan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResizingEuropean unionKuznets curvePer capitaPer capita incomeEconomicsEu countriesMember statesInternational economicsDevelopment economicsDemographic economicsEconomic growthDemographyPopulation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC) hypothesis between the levels of air pollution and per capita income growth, considering the largest enlargement of the European Union (EU). Four different measures of environmental quality, SPM, NOX, SO2, and CO2, are employed for three different country groups: the core fifteen countries of the EU before its largest enlargement, the twenty five EU countries after the enlargement, and the new ten countries that became the members of the EU after this enlargement process. The results present a statistically significant U-shaped EKC relationship between each of the air pollutants and per capita income growth for the core fifteen EU member countries and the twenty-five countries after the enlargement. These findings imply that beyond a certain level of GDP, a further rise in income can only be reached at the cost of environmental degradation. For the third country group of the study, the countries that joined the EU after its largest enlargement, there is no statistically significant evidence for the existence of an EKC in any type.

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)0.003
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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Citations8
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207