An Examination of the Relationship between Air Quality and Income in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The environmental Kuznets curve hypothesis suggests that at high income levels, economic growth is accompanied by decreasing concentrations of air pollutants. We examine the relationship between four common air pollutants and income across Canadian provinces and metropolitan areas. Our study improves upon past studies of the relationship in Canada in two ways. First, our use of panel methods and pollution concentration data from individual monitoring stations allows for a much larger sample size than previous Canadian studies. Furthermore, our econometric modeling approach separates and identifies the relative magnitudes of the scale, composition, and technique effects. Our results are as expected for annual average concentrations of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide, and carbon monoxide: a positive effect of increases in the scale of the economy was completely offset by improvements in technology and changes in the composition of output. Similar results are found for ground‐level ozone when choosing the measure used to assess the Canada‐Wide Standard; however, the results when using annual average concentrations of ozone are much different. We attribute this difference to the focus of government policy to reduce short‐term, rather than long‐term, exposure to ozone.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".