MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2612034846 · doi:10.1787/95c2b371-en

Possibilities and challenges in transfer and generalisation of monetary estimates for environmental and health benefits of regulating chemicals

2017· paratext· en· W2612034846 on OpenAlex

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

VenueOECD environment working papers · 2017
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsImpact
FundersEuropean CommissionAmerican Chemistry Council
KeywordsValuation (finance)Ecosystem servicesValue (mathematics)BusinessEnvironmental resource managementRisk analysis (engineering)Environmental economicsEconomicsComputer scienceEcosystemEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper reviews and discusses existing methodologies for transferring and extrapolating the economic value of health and environmental impacts across chemicals, and identifies challenges with such value transfer and when it can be suitable. The value transfer methodologies describes can be used to estimate the economic benefits of chemical management regulatory frameworks as a whole, as well as in cost-benefit analyses (CBAs) of risk management measures for individual chemicals. For economic valuation of mortality risks from chemicals, the OECD database of Stated Preference (SP) studies of Value of Statistical Life (VSL) , which should be continuously updated with new valuation studies, has a sufficient number of primary studies internationally to conduct value transfer using meta-analytic regressions. However, the empirical evidence on acute and chronic morbidity endpoints, especially concerning all costs components of chronic illnesses, seems to be scarce. The same is true for chemical-related environmental impacts, especially related to ecosystem services, for the multitude of chemicals. Thus, the main methodological and informational challenge for valid value transfer of environmental and health impacts from chemical regulations seems to be new primary valuation studies of morbidity and ecosystem services impacts caused by exposure to (groups of) chemicals. These new primary valuation studies should be designed with value transfer in mind, and cover several countries, in order to extrapolate and generalise the economic values to evaluate international chemical regulations in CBAs. These new primary studies should ideally cover all relevant scales of the impacts, in order to develop generalised adjustment factors for differences in scale of the impacts between the study sites and the policy site. This would improve the spatial transfer of values. The same is true for the combination of Geographical Information System (GIS) data with existing primary studies of impacts at different scales. Furthermore, these new primary studies should be repeated over time in order to provide more information about how values for the relevant impacts change over time; as preferences, scarcity of the public good and the real income of the affected population change. This would improve temporal transfer.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.328
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.198
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.043 · 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