Financial Swing for Well-Being: Jazz Economy and Modelling the Social Return of Sustainable Capital Markets
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper examines how shifts in sustainable capital markets influence societal well-being through the lens of a “Jazz Economy”, highlighting improvisation and adaptability in financial systems while grounding the analysis in empirical modelling. A panel of EUROSTAT indicators for 27 EU member states (2019–2022) was analyzed, including green bond issuance, market capitalization, environmental taxation, social spending, life expectancy, and subjective life satisfaction. Hierarchical clustering grouped these indicators into coherent patterns of “financial swings”, which were then linked to a composite quality-of-life index through an Adaptive Neuro-Fuzzy Inference System (ANFIS), with results benchmarked against linear regression and random forests. The inclusion of time lags between fiscal, financial, and social indicators strengthens the causal interpretation of the results, moving beyond simple correlations. Findings show that higher public environmental protection spending combined with a strong net international investment position consistently predicts greater life satisfaction, whereas income and longevity alone do not guarantee improvements in subjective well-being, reflecting nonlinear interactions among fiscal, financial, and social variables. Robustness checks, including the exclusion of pandemic years, confirm the stability of outcomes. The study concludes that cohesive fiscal–financial strategies, integrating environmental policy and macro-financial resilience, are essential for enhancing quality of life and that sustainable finance can deliver tangible social benefits beyond metaphorical framing.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".