Political Economy of Environmental Poverty: The Role of Political Risk and Income Level
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental poverty is a global concern for developed and developing economies, particularly in light of sustainable development goals.Unlike previous research, this study evaluates the role of political risk index and income level on environmental poverty in developed regions, namely, OECD economies in the period 2004-2022.We also examine the role of renewable energy consumption.We initially developed a multidimensional index for assessing weighted average environmental poverty alongside a novel index to gauge political risk within OECD economies.We employ several panel econometric procedures, including cross-sectional dependence and slope heterogeneity, CIPS unit root circle for identifying unit roots and Westerlund cointegration for long-run connection among variables.Besides, the study employed cross-sectional autoregressive distributive lags (CS-ARDL) to identify the short-run and long-run impact of explanatory variables on environmental poverty.The results show that variables are heterogenous and cross-sectionally dependent.Moreover, the unit roots are found within the unit root circle, implying that variables are static at the first difference and long-run equilibrium exists among variables.The empirical results confirm that the political risk index reduces environmental poverty.A one-percent increase in the betterment of the political risk index lowers environmental poverty by -0.022% and -0.034%, respectively.However, the results for PRI in the short run are inconclusive while effective Politick ekonomie 2025
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it