MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4400079830 · doi:10.1016/j.jpubeco.2024.105167

Job displacement costs of phasing out coal

2024· article· en· W4400079830 on OpenAlexaff
Juan-Pablo Rud, Michael Simmons, Gerhard Toews, Fernando M. Aragón

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Public Economics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicEmployment and Welfare Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersSvenska Handelsbankens ForskningsstiftelseOffice for National Statistics
KeywordsEconomicsCoalDisplacement (psychology)PhaserLabour economicsMicroeconomicsPhysicsEngineeringPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The reduction of carbon emissions will require a rapid phasing out of coal and the displacement of millions of coal miners. How much could this energy transition cost mining workers? We use the dramatic collapse of the UK coal industry to estimate the long-term impact on displaced miners. We find evidence of substantial losses: hourly wages fell by 40% and earnings fell by 80% to 90% one year after job loss. These losses are persistent and remain significantly depressed fifteen years later, amounting to present discounted value earnings losses of between four and six times the miners pre-displacement earnings. • We estimate the decline in earnings following displacement during the collapse of coal mining in the UK. • Hourly wages fell by 40% and earnings fell by 80% to 90% one year after job loss. • Earnings remain depressed 15 years later. • Present value earnings losses amount to between 4 and 6 times the miners pre-displacement earnings.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.109
GPT teacher head0.420
Teacher spread0.311 · 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

Citations12
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Public EconomicsSame topicEmployment and Welfare StudiesFrench-language works237,207