ScienceGuardians hosts editors too
Secure Environment: Verified contributors only, ensuring meaningful and responsible discussions. Members can stay anonymous while verified, ensuring legitimacy and accountability.
Combatting Misconduct: A fortress against anonymous intimidation and coordinated campaigns, fostering evidence-based dialogue and protecting the academic community.
Resources and Training: Access classified content, participate in enlightening debates, and stay at the forefront of ethical practices.
Hack-Proof Platform: Your privacy is paramount. The identity information of users choosing to remain anonymous is securely stored offline.
Our Commitment:
Integrity and Accountability: Every account verified for credible and responsible engagement.
Inclusivity and Fairness: A platform where all voices in the scientific community are respected.
Support and Collaboration: Helping resolve issues delicately and constructively.
Participant
This paper raises significant methodological concerns, including an unjustified reliance on MMQR without robustness checks and a potentially flawed energy poverty index calculation. Additionally, inconsistencies in the reported impact of economic growth, green finance, and technological innovation—particularly the unusually strong effects—warrant further scrutiny. I invite the authors to address these issues to ensure the accuracy and reliability of their findings.
The findings suggest that economic growth increases energy poverty, which contrasts with conventional theories linking development to improved energy access. Could the authors elaborate on potential mechanisms behind this relationship and whether factors like income inequality or inefficient energy distribution play a role?