MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W6904737740 · doi:10.14288/1.0398366

Zero Waste and Circular Economy Planning : Innovations in Food Systems

2021· article· en· W6904737740 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2021
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineAgricultural and Biological Sciences
ThématiqueFood Waste Reduction and Sustainability
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésCircular economyZero wasteSustainabilityAction planGovernment (linguistics)Cleaner productionMunicipal solid wasteGreenhouse gas

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

In 2014 the University of British Columbia developed a Zero Waste Action Plant (ZWAP) with the goal of becoming a zero waste institution and diverting 80% of waste by 2020. Initially, UBC had largely focused on waste diversion through waste sorting from the separation of waste into garbage, recycling and organics. However, this strategy came with many issues. One being the reliance on an individual's knowledge and ability to properly sort waste and unfortunately the 80% diversion target was not met. This project moved away from the diversion approach and focused rather on the approach of circular economies through reusable foodware materials to progress UBC towards being a zero waste institute. The government of Canada defines a circular economy as “a new way of doing business that extracts as much value as possible from resources by recycling, repairing, reusing, repurposing, or refurbishing products and materials—eliminating waste and greenhouse gas emissions at the design stage” (Environment Canada, 2021). This approach allows there to be harmony in finding a balance between environmental and economic sustainability working to prevent waste from happening in the first place. The overall purpose of this project was to identify the best practices in circular economy planning to propose strategies for UBC’s upcoming Zero Waste Action Plan 2030. Part of our research included investigating UBC’s small-scale circular economy within the Green2Go reusable foodware program. To fulfil the overall purpose, goals were clearly set to produce viable options to enhance the efficiency of operations in the Green2Go reusable foodware program and provide concrete recommendations to UBC’s ZWAP 2030. As the Green2Go program is primarily used among first-year students living in residence, the final goal established was to create an overall culture change around reusable foodware among first year students living in residence. To accomplish these goals, a survey targeted to first-year students in residence was distributed. The data collected help build recommendations for the Green2Go program to further enhance the circular model already established at UBC. By focusing on the first-year population, the project’s impact will have lasting effects as they will spend more time on campus from the project’s completion date. This focus can allow for a domino effect among future incoming first-years, and eventually the robust culture and awareness of reusable foodware will be widespread among UBC undergraduate students. In addition, the increase of participation in a circular economy through foodware may inspire others to discover other innovations to contribute to UBC’s circular economy. To conduct the research into this topic effectively, Community-Based Action Research (CBAR) was used with a targeted approach focusing on UBC Food Services representatives, UBC policy makers, and first-year undergraduate students. The three key stakeholder groups will be the leaders in the construction of a circular economy at UBC to achieve zero-waste status for years to come. From surveying the key stakeholder group of first-year students, the data was collected using Qualtrics survey platform and analysis was conducted using Excel to produce relevant data to inform on our overall recommendations. This report identifies the need for improvements to the Green2Go program and strategies to further UBC’s stride towards a zero-waste institute. Recommendations are framed in the context of reducing waste as this was found to be the most important step when driving towards zero waste. The key leverage point for the Zero Waste Action Plan is to enhance the presence of a circular economy at UBC through the scaling up of the Green2Go program. Beyond this we recommend that the ZWAP 2030 committee take our discussion questions found under section 4.3 and facilitate dialogue with stakeholders within the various streams of UBC operations to assess value chains opportunities to shift towards a circular model. Recommendations for the Green2Go program specifically can be summarized into more incentives, increased number of return locations, and clear and consistent communication with program stakeholders. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,009
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,018
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,130

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0090,012
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,001
Bibliométrie0,0020,002
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0030,015
Communication savante0,0080,009
Science ouverte0,0030,007
Intégrité de la recherche0,0030,004
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0080,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,013
Tête enseignante GPT0,170
Écart entre enseignants0,156 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Même sujetFood Waste Reduction and SustainabilityTravaux en français237 207