A comparative study of responsible care and ISO 14001 as an effective environmental management system in the chemical and allied industry in South Africa.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the ever increasing promulgation of environmental legislation in recent years in South Africa, enforcement of these laws is a threat to the chemical and allied industries.In order for these industries to secure operating licences and facilitate international trade, the need for environmental management systems has become imperative.South Africa, being behind the rest of the first world countries in adopting Environmental Management Systems(EMSs), had only recently in the 2000s started to realise the importance of the EMSs in ensuring environmental legal compliance and increasing trade across barriers.The chemical and allied industries chose to adopt Responsible Care and ISO 14001.2004 in South Africa.ISO 14001.2004 is an international standard and Responsible Care is a standard that was developed by the Canadian Chemical Producer"s Association and is used in numerous countries around the world.This study was undertaken to determine whether implementing and running two EMSs in organisations is necessary and if both standards add value.The reason for the study is that both EMSs have similar requirements Glossary
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".