Briefing: Social facets of solid waste: insights from the global south
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
Most commonly municipal solid waste is being treated from an engineering and technological perspective only and is either perceived as a nuisance or a commodity, while the social facets permeating waste issues are less prominent in this debate. Conceptualising waste as being worthless and yet also a coveted resource reveals a central contradiction affecting waste, which surfaces in solid waste management decision making. The complexity of current waste problems requires an integrated, multifaceted and interdisciplinary approach that is aware of the social side of materials. Production, consumption and lifestyle habits generate waste, which is part of the current, global environmental crisis. Reduction and recovery of recyclable materials address the serious ecological ‘overshoot’ concern of this crisis. Informal but organised recycling in Brazil is discussed as an innovative form of an inclusive resource recovery and environmental awareness strategy. Public policies need to safeguard the social dimension in addition to the ecological and economic aspects in waste management.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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