Recycling Practice to Promote Sustainable Behavior at University Campus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, attitudes toward sustainable behavior refer to an individual’s responsibility in using the natural resources granted by Allah S.W.T. while taking into consideration the interests of future generations. These actions must start from oneself, and include simple and immediately necessary actions. For example, recycling is a simple practice that must be engaged in by all individuals. As a leading university that launched a SUSTAINABLE PROGRAM involving the majority of its highly educated community, its image would be tarnished if this simple practice was not carried out. Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia (UKM), through its zero waste campus initiative and in collaboration with the research group of Alam Flora Sdn Bhd, has deployed recycling activities effectively since 2010 using an improved a management recycling system, improving existing facilities and intensifying awareness campaigns. However, the response from the UKM community is low, with an average recycling rate of 1.75% (April 2010 to July 2012) and an average of eight persons/week who sent recyclable items to the UKM Recycling Center (April 2011 to July 2012). Surveys taken regarding the involvement of the UKM community in recycling activity are discussed to obtain an overview of the facilities and the changes required to improve the recycling management system. Based on a problem analysis using a fishbone diagram, peoples’ attitudes are shown to be a primary cause of the low response to the recycling program. The targeted recycling rate of 20% requires the continued cooperation and efforts of the entire UKM community to promote an educated culture of sustainability at the University.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".