Environmental sciences, sustainable development and circular economy: Alternative concepts for trans-disciplinary research
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
ABSTRACT: The intermeshing of disciplines from the natural sciences, social sciences, engineering and management has become essential to addressing today's environmental challenges. Yet, this can be a daunting task because experts from different disciplines may conceptualize the problems in very different ways and use vocabularies that may not be well understood by one another. This paper explores three alternative environmental concepts used in transdisciplinary research, and outlines some of the epistemological and practical problems that each one poses. It pays particular attention to the increasingly popular concept of “circular economy”, and contrasts it with the more commonly-used concepts of “environmental sciences” and “sustainable development”. In clarifying the nature, meaning and inter-relationship of these alternative concepts, the paper helps trans-disciplinary researchers to understand the opportunities and challenges associated with each one.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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