MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387768861 · doi:10.1017/9781009319782

A Green and Just Recovery from COVID-19?

2023· book· en· W4387768861 on OpenAlexafffund
Kyla Tienhaara, Tom Moerenhout, Vanessa Corkal, Joachim Roth, Hannah Ascough, Jessica Herrera Betancur, Samantha Hussman, Jessica L. Oliver, Kabir Shahani, Tianna Tischbein

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicCOVID-19 impact on air quality
Canadian institutionsInternational Institute for Sustainable DevelopmentQueen's University
FundersMitacsCanada Research ChairsUniversity of CambridgeWorld Bank Group
KeywordsDisadvantagedCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Stimulus (psychology)Economic recoveryPandemicInequalityPolitical scienceGreen economyEconomicsDevelopment economicsPublic economicsEconomic growthBusinessPsychologySustainable developmentMacroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Stimulus spending to address the economic crisis brought on by the COVID-19 pandemic has the potential to either facilitate the transition away from fossil energy or to lock in carbon-intensive technologies and infrastructure for decades to come. Whether they are focused on green sectors or not, stimulus measures can alleviate or reinforce socio-economic inequality. This Element delves into the data in the Energy Policy Tracker to assess the extent to which energy policies adopted during the pandemic will expedite decarbonization and explores whether governments address inequities through policies targeted to disadvantaged, marginalized and underserved individuals and communities. The overall finding is that the recovery has not been sufficiently green or just. Nevertheless, a small number of policies aim to advance distributive justice and provide potential models for policymakers as they continue to attempt to 'build back better'. This title is also available as Open Access on Cambridge Core.

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 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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.207 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations11
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicCOVID-19 impact on air qualityFrench-language works237,207