Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to apply a methodology (drawn from the literature) to value the environment as a capital. Design/methodology/approach – The main analytic framework considered is a factor utilization function, which traditionally deals with labour and manufactured capital. The development of a three-factor function in terms of labour, manufactured capital and environmental capital enables the display of mistaken notions of economic performance. Findings – The purpose of this illustration is to identify the patterns of environmental capital utilization as an economy grows. Although there are some differences in the patterns of environment utilization between Australia and Canada, the patterns observed are in line with that of the environmental Kuznets curve (EKC). Practical implications – This illustration is made with reference to two commodity-driven economies, namely, Australia and Canada. The findings could be used as a point of reference for resource rich economies. Originality/value – This paper illustrates an approach for valuing the environment as an economy grows. This approach is applied to two selected resource rich economies and the findings demonstrate traits similar to that of the EKC.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".