This article presents a systematic review of the academic, institutional, and primary legal literature on environmental taxes, green tax incentives, and plastic taxes in Europe and Latin America between 2015 and 2024. The study was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA structure and was based on a search in Scopus and Google Scholar. During the identification phase, 840 records were retrieved. After screening and an assessment of eligibility, 51 studies and reports were included in the review. Of these, 36 included in the main comparative tables. The findings show that certain European countries report stronger articulation between environmental taxation, technological innovation, circular economy strategies, institutional monitoring, and the reduction of externalities, particularly regarding carbon taxes, energy taxes, plastic bag taxes, waste-related levies, and incentives for clean technologies. However, Europe cannot be treated as a homogeneous bloc. In Latin America, relevant progress is identified in Ecuador, Colombia, Peru, Chile, and Brazil, although constrained by regulatory fragmentation, economic informality, limited data availability, weaker enforcement capacity, and institutional coordination gaps. The review concludes that the gap between the two regions is not only legal, but also technical, institutional, and related to environmental fiscal governance. Environmental and plastic taxes may contribute to SDGs 12 and 13 when integrated with circular economy policies, ex post evaluation, tax progressivity, compensatory mechanisms, and strengthened tax administrations.

The rights of nature have transformed Andean environmental law by challenging the assumption that only human interests can organize constitutional protection. This narrative legal review examines that transformation across Ecuador, Bolivia, Colombia, and Peru, the four members of the Andean Community. The review analyzes a curated corpus of 91 academic, constitutional, legislative, judicial, regional, and international sources through four lenses: legal subjecthood, ecological normativity, intercultural legitimacy, and institutional enforceability. The comparison identifies four distinct pathways. Ecuador constitutionalized nature as a rights-bearing subject and subsequently developed an increasingly specific body of constitutional jurisprudence. Bolivia combined plurinational constitutionalism with statutory rights of Mother Earth and a state-centered framework for integral development in harmony with nature. Colombia reached comparable outcomes through judicial construction, especially through biocultural rights and guardianship arrangements for ecosystems. Peru retained a predominantly anthropocentric environmental-rights model, although constitutional doctrine, municipal initiatives, and reform proposals reveal a growing ecocentric opening. Across the subregion, formal recognition is neither necessary nor sufficient for ecological effectiveness, understood here as the capacity of legal rules and remedies to prevent, halt, or reverse the degradation of protected ecological functions and processes. Outcomes depend on standing, representation, scientific and Indigenous knowledge, remedial design, monitoring, budgets, and the capacity to confront extractive political economies. Andean Community instruments provide a valuable regional layer for biodiversity, genetic resources, and environmental cooperation, but they do not yet harmonize the legal status of nature. The review concludes that the strongest future model is a plural and enforceable ecological constitutionalism: one that protects nature’s intrinsic value, preserves human and collective environmental rights, embeds intercultural participation, and translates judicial declarations into measurable restoration and non-regression duties.

Demand for green skills denotes the requirement, on the part of employers and productive structures, for knowledge, abilities, and dispositions oriented towards reducing the environmental impact of economic activity. It differs from green employment in that it records occupational content rather than jobs. It can be measured by two routes: the occupational route, which infers the skill content of jobs from occupational classifications and taxonomies, and the direct route, which captures the demand expressed by employers or by the labour market through surveys, interviews and the analysis of job advertisements. Sectoral approaches, which classify economic activities, inform on green employment but do not, on their own, reach the level of the skill. In the sources reviewed for Latin America, the category has no statistical existence: none of the 20 countries considered was found to maintain a classification of green skills, the global indicator monitoring target 4.4 of the Sustainable Development Goals measures digital rather than environmental skills, and national green employment estimates vary within a single country by factors of up to 14.2 depending on the methodological decision adopted. The only quantification of training demand identified in the literature reviewed was carried out in Brazil on 2010 data and identified 2,083,241 formal jobs, 4.5% of the country’s formal employment, in occupations whose requirements change as a result of the green transition. This entry delimits the concept against green employment, contrasts the available occupational taxonomies, inventories country-level coverage, documents the mechanisms producing that variation, and identifies the gaps that the available evidence leaves open.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has rapidly entered undergraduate research training, yet its relationship with research self-efficacy and attitudes toward scientific research remains underexplored among Health Sciences students. This cross-sectional study examined how self-reported GenAI literacy and research self-efficacy are associated with attitudes toward scientific research, separately and when modelled together. Of 101 submissions from undergraduate Health Sciences students enrolled in research courses at a private Peruvian university, 91 were analysed after 10 invariant response patterns were excluded. Students completed a 36-item self-report questionnaire whose items had been reviewed for content relevance and clarity by three experts. Analyses combined Spearman correlations, multiple regression with HC3 standard errors, a bootstrapped indirect-effect model and exploratory fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Reliability computed from the three dimension scores of each construct was α = 0.861 for GenAI literacy, 0.927 for research self-efficacy and 0.790 for attitudes. GenAI literacy correlated with attitudes (ρ = 0.475, Holm-adjusted p < 0.001), but in the female–male regression model (n = 90), research self-efficacy was the only one of the two capability scores that retained a statistically significant adjusted association (b = 0.353, 95% CI 0.087 to 0.619, p = 0.010; GenAI literacy b = 0.088, 95% CI −0.214 to 0.389, p = 0.564; R² = 0.405). The indirect term through research self-efficacy (0.313, 95% CI 0.092 to 0.536) is a statistical decomposition of overlapping, contemporaneous scores rather than evidence of a mechanism. Discriminant validity between GenAI literacy and research self-efficacy was not established (HTMT = 0.912), and parallel analysis favoured two factors rather than three. Under the primary calibration (theoretical anchors 2-3-4 with crossover memberships assigned to 0.501), functional knowledge and the critical–ethical evaluation of GenAI appeared in both terms of the intermediate fsQCA solution (consistency = 0.913, coverage = 0.741), but the minimised solutions changed with alternative anchors and with the handling of cases at the crossover. The findings describe associations among self-reported measures; whether developing both capabilities jointly improves research attitudes remains a question for future evaluation.

Generative artificial intelligence (GenAI) has rapidly permeated undergraduate research training, yet its relationship with research self-efficacy and attitudes toward scientific research remains underexplored in health sciences students. This cross-sectional study examined how GenAI literacy and research self-efficacy relate to attitudes toward scientific research, and whether their contribution is direct or channelled through self-efficacy. A total of 91 undergraduate health sciences students enrolled in research courses at a private Peruvian university with campuses across several regions completed a 36-item Likert scale covering three higher-order constructs, validated by three expert researchers. Data were collected between March and May 2026. Analyses combined descriptive statistics, Spearman correlations, HC3 robust multiple regression, and fuzzy-set qualitative comparative analysis (fsQCA). Reliability was adequate to excellent (GenAI literacy α = 0.861, AVE = 0.675; research self-efficacy α = 0.927, AVE = 0.810; attitudes α = 0.790, AVE = 0.603). GenAI literacy correlated with attitudes (ρ = 0.475, adjusted p < 0.001) but lost independent weight once self-efficacy entered the regression (b = 0.084, p = 0.570), whereas research self-efficacy remained the strongest adjusted predictor (b = 0.356, 95% CI 0.091-0.620, p = 0.009); the model explained 40.4% of the variance (F(4, 86) = 14.60, p < 0.001). Discriminant validity between GenAI literacy and self-efficacy was incomplete (HTMT = 0.912). The fsQCA identified functional knowledge and critical-ethical evaluation of GenAI as core conditions present in every sufficient configuration for high attitudes (intermediate solution consistency = 0.913). Findings indicate that GenAI literacy shapes research attitudes indirectly, through research self-efficacy, and that its ethical-critical dimension is a recurrent ingredient of favourable dispositions. Interventions should strengthen research confidence and critical GenAI literacy jointly rather than as separate competencies.