MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3125723980

Eco-efficiency and convergence in OECD countries

2011· preprint· en· W3125723980 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mariam Camarero, Juana Castillo, Andrés J. Picazo‐Tadeo, Cecilio Tamarit

Bibliographic record

VenueRePEc: Research Papers in Economics · 2011
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvergence (economics)Data envelopment analysisMediterranean climatePollutantNOxEu countriesAir pollutantsEconomicsEconomyGeographyEuropean unionAir pollutionInternational economicsEconomic growthMathematicsChemistry
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper assesses the convergence in eco-efficiency of a group of 22 OECD countries over the period 1980-2005. In doing so, three air-pollutants representing the impact on the environment of economic activities are considered, namely, carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOX) and sulphur oxides (SOX); furthermore, eco-efficiency scores at both country and air-pollutant-specific levels are computed using Data Envelopment Analysis techniques. Then, convergence is evaluated using the recent approach by Phillips and Sul (2007), which allows testing for the existence of convergence groups. First, we find that, with the exception of NOX emissions, eco-efficiency has improved over the period, the greatest progress corresponding to CO2 emissions. Second, Switzerland is the most eco-efficient country, followed by some Scandinavian economies such as Sweden, Norway, Iceland and Denmark. In contrast, European Mediterranean countries such as Portugal, Spain and Greece, in addition to Hungary, Turkey, Canada or the US, are among the worst performers. Finally, we find that both the most eco-efficient countries and the worst-performing countries also tend to form clubs of convergence among them.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0070.007
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.222 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRePEc: Research Papers in EconomicsSame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207