MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2544293588 · doi:10.1177/0013916516673869

Testing Scenarios to Achieve Workplace Sustainability Goals Using Backcasting and Agent-Based Modeling

2016· article· en· W2544293588 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Ricardo García‐Mira, Adina Dumitru, Amparo Alonso‐Betanzos, Noelia Sánchez‐Maroño, Óscar Fontenla-Romero, Tony Craig, Gary Polhill

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Behavior · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEnvironmental Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaEuropean Commission
KeywordsBackcastingAutonomySustainabilityCitizen journalismWork (physics)Scenario analysisEnvironmental economicsProcess managementBusinessKnowledge managementEnvironmental resource managementComputer scienceEngineeringEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pro-environmental behaviors have been analyzed in the home, with little attention to other important contexts of everyday life, such as the workplace. The research reported here explored three categories of pro-environmental behavior (consumption of materials and energy, waste generation, and work-related commuting) in a public large-scale organization in Spain, with the aim of identifying the most effective policy options for a sustainable organization. Agent-based modeling was used to design a virtual simulation of the organization. Psychologically informed profiles of employees were defined using data gathered through a questionnaire, measuring knowledge, motivations, and ability. Future scenarios were developed using a participatory backcasting scenario development methodology, and policy tracks were derived. Dynamic simulations indicated that, to be effective, organizational policy should strengthen worker participation and autonomy, be sustained over time, and should combine different measures of medium intensity for behavior change, instead of isolated policies of high intensity.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.272
Teacher spread0.243 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations14
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and BehaviorSame topicEnvironmental Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207