Economics and environment: An impossible reconciliation?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It should be noted that the relationship between economics and the environment has never previously featured as one of mankind’s primary or principal concerns. It presently does. The recent worldwide student mobilization for climate action, the Climate Change Congress in Paris (December 2015) or the dieselgate related to the scandals involving companies in the automobile sector not complying with regulatory environmental norms (which started also in 2015), among many other issues, provide evidence that this relationship is presently of central concern to questions regarding the future of mankind. Nevertheless, we should remind ourselves of the fact that, despite being a recurrent theme in the media, the environment continued to be a treated by economists as a subsidiary issue until, in relatively recent times, the effects of the global environmental crisis grew to proportions that meant it became of serious concern to the future of mankind. The aim of this paper is to trace the historical relationship between the environment and economics. In fact, the focus is more modest: we aim to illustrate the principal traces of the presence of the environment in economic science in an attempt to exhibit a path which might lead to the reconciliation of the one (the environment) with the other (economics).
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 | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.035 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".