MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404514935 · doi:10.1016/j.erss.2024.103845

Inequality is driving the climate crisis: A longitudinal analysis of province-level carbon emissions in Canada, 1997–2020

2024· article· en· W4404514935 on OpenAlexaffabout
Andrew K. Jorgenson, Taekyeong Goh, Ryan P. Thombs, Yasmin Koop‐Monteiro, Mark Shakespear, Grace Gletsu, Nicolas Viens

Bibliographic record

VenueEnergy Research & Social Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInequalityGreenhouse gasClimate changeEnvironmental scienceGeographyEconomicsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The authors conduct a comprehensive analysis of the relationship between carbon emissions and income inequality for the Canadian provinces for the 1997 to 2020 period. The results indicate that the short-run and long-run effects of the income share of the top 10 % and the top 5 % on province-level emissions are positive, robust to various model specifications, net of multiple demographic and economic factors, not sensitive to exogenous shocks or outlier cases, symmetrical, statistically equivalent for emissions from different sectors, and their short-term effects do not vary in magnitude through time. The findings also consistently show that the estimated effect of the Gini coefficient on province-level emissions is not statistically significant. Overall, the results underscore the importance in modeling the effects of income inequality measures that quantify different characteristics of income distributions, and they are very consistent with analytical approaches regarding power concentration, overconsumption, and status competition that suggest that a higher concentration of income leads to growth in anthropogenic carbon emissions.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.379
Threshold uncertainty score0.601

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.232 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnergy Research & Social ScienceSame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207