A novel dataset for analysing sub-national socioeconomic developments in the Indian coal industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Coal use needs to rapidly decline in the global energy mix in the next few decades in order to meet the Paris climate goals of keeping global warming well below 2-degrees Celsius. In emerging economies such as India (the second largest producer and consumer of coal) this would entail reducing long-term coal dependency. Prior work has focused on a coal transition in India from a techno-economic point of view, yet little attention has been given to the socio-economic dimensions of this transition. This is in part due to lack of availability of datasets required for such analysis. The first step in understanding the socio-economic dimensions of a coal transition in India is to understand the scale of current socio-economic dependency on coal at the sub-national level. We contribute to this literature by creating a novel dataset comprised of all 459 operational coal mines in India, using multiple Right to Information Act applications (India’s Freedom of Information Act) and then combining this dataset with coal company wise employment factors to estimate direct job numbers at the district level (a sub-administrative unit). We find that coal is produced in 51 districts in 13 states in India with large variations in employment numbers among these districts. While Korba district in Chhattisgarh state is the highest coal producing district, Dhanbad district in Jharkhand state is home to the highest number of coal mining workers. This is the first attempt at understanding the socio-economic dependency on coal at a district level and future work could focus on quantifying other district level socio-economic indicators such as coal related revenues. The new dataset and the results of this paper will be useful for scholars conducting future work on coal transitions and related topics.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.004 |
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".