Solid Waste Management in Small Island Destinations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid waste management is a critical, complex, multi-dimensional challenge for societies. The nature of solid waste management in each community can differ based upon a number of factors including economic activities and geographies. Solid waste management in small island tourist communities is often complicated by their isolated geographies and tourism dominated economies, resulting in even greater challenges for ensuring sustainable solid waste management. This article discusses a case study of the small tourist island of Gili Trawangan, Indonesia that has addressed their long-standing issues of solid waste management through a governance and management approach centered on a multi-stakeholder partnership. The partnership involves collaboration between a community-based organization and environmental non-governmental organization, each having broader ties to stakeholders in the island community. Through this partnership they have seen improvements with stakeholder involvement, access to resources, financial support, transparency and accountability, and have been able to implement a number of key initiatives to improve waste management in this destination and move towards sustainability. Initiatives include source separation, expansion of collection services, revised collection fees, material reuse projects, education and awareness initiatives and enhanced planning.
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.
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 | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it