Environmental hazards: The microgeography of land‐use negative externalities
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The decisions on the siting of hazardous facilities and compensation for nearby landowners depend on an accurate estimation of the negative externalities these facilities place on proximate land uses, primarily residential properties. In this paper, we highlight the sensitivity of these estimates to the treatment of distance from the hazard and to the presence of other nearby externality generating land uses identified at a highly granular geographic level. We find that estimated spillovers are quite sensitive to highly localized treatment of other land uses and that naive parametric specifications yield misleading results. Unlike previous work, we find proximity to a major oil pipeline results in lower house prices: properties adjacent to a property with a pipeline easement transact for 2.2% ($C 15.8k) less and those one property further away 1.6% ($C 11k) less than more distant residential properties. These effects vary by the type of land use on which the pipeline easement lies. Difference‐in‐differences tests indicate that the price effects of proximity respond to information shocks that remind potential buyers of pipeline risks but not those shocks that merely remind them of the presence of the pipeline. However, the effects of an information shock, in this case a nearby spill on the pipeline, dissipate within 18 months.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 it