A Framework for Integrating Ecosystem Services into China’s Circular Economy: The Case of Eco-Industrial Parks
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
Identified as critical for sustainable development, ecosystem services are increasingly being put on the policy agendas of governments and corporations. China is now facing serious environmental challenges caused by losses of ecosystem services and recently has recognized that the country is reaching its environmental capacity. The circular economy (CE) has been positioned as a key strategy for national economic and social development by the national government as a way to resolve problems of resource depletion and environmental pollution. It will be increasingly critical to link ecosystem services to the CE. This means that the CE needs to be expanded to include restoration and regeneration of ecosystem services. This paper proposes a framework comprised of components including policies, governance, techniques and technologies, business development, key actors and support organizations for incorporating ecosystem services into the CE and focuses on industrial ecosystems, specifically eco-industrial parks (EIPs), as microcosms of a CE. Taking China as an example, this paper explores whether this framework can be applied to EIPs. The paper concludes that there are many opportunities to apply the framework to China’s EIPs.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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 it