MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7106856518 · doi:10.14288/cjur.v8i1.198483

Revisiting the Environmental Kuznets Curve Model: Greenhouse Gas Emissions within Canada

2023· article· en· W7106856518 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Collections · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEnergy, Environment, Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKuznets curveGreenhouse gasEnvironmental degradationPer capitaPer capita incomeClimate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The change in human behavior from living on the land to living off of the land's resources through industrialization, increasing living standards, and rising incomes have been marked by rapidly increasing emissions of greenhouse gasses (GHGs) into the earth’s atmosphere. The Environmental Kuznets curve (EKC) hypothesis posits that as income grows, environmental degradation increases until an economy reaches a tipping point, beyond which environmental degradation will decline as income increases (Stern, 2004). This study empirically examines the validity of the EKC hypothesis as applied to Canada’s provinces and territories from 1990-2020, using data on GHG emissions and GDP per capita as environmental degradation and income indicators. Overall, the results of this study support the EKC hypothesis at the Canadian level and confirm the results found by previous studies. Confirmation of the EKC indicates that increasing economic growth in Canada’s provinces and territories is unlikely to lead to higher greenhouse gas emissions and instead is likely to result in decreasing GHG 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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.251

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0030.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.181 · 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen CollectionsSame topicEnergy, Environment, Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207