MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3036201512 · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2020.115988

Nature-based solutions as enablers of circularity in water systems: A review on assessment methodologies, tools and indicators

2020· review· en· W3036201512 on OpenAlexfundno aff
C.E. Nika, Lucia Gusmaroli, Mahdieh Ghafourian, Nataša Atanasova, Gianluigi Buttiglieri, Evina Katsou

Bibliographic record

VenueWater Research · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater-Energy-Food Nexus Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersHorizon 2020 Framework ProgrammeJavna Agencija za Raziskovalno Dejavnost RSMinisterio de Economía y CompetitividadGeneralitat de CatalunyaCentres de Recerca de CatalunyaCanadian Institute for Advanced Research
KeywordsWater infrastructureWater sectorEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental resource managementComponent (thermodynamics)Water resourcesEnvironmental planningComputer scienceRisk analysis (engineering)BusinessEnvironmental engineeringWater supply

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Water has been pushed into a linear model, which is increasingly acknowledged of causing cumulative emissions of pollutants, waste stocks, and impacting on the irreversible deterioration of water and other resources. Moving towards a circular model in the water sector, the configuration of future water infrastructure changes through the integration of grey and green infrastructure, forming Nature-based Solutions (NBS) as an integral component that connects human-managed to nature-managed water systems. In this study, a thorough appraisal of the latest literature is conducted, providing an overview of the existing tools, methodologies and indicators that have been used to assess NBS for water management, as well as complete water systems considering the need of assessing both anthropogenic and natural elements. Furthermore, facilitators and barriers with respect to existing policies and regulations on NBS and circularity have been identified. The study concludes that the co-benefits of NBS for water management are not adequately assessed. A holistic methodology assessing complete water systems from a circularity perspective is still needed integrating existing tools (i.e. hydro-biogeochemical models), methods (i.e. MFA-based and LCA) and incorporating existing and/or newly-developed indicators.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.326
GPT teacher head0.461
Teacher spread0.135 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations131
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWater ResearchSame topicWater-Energy-Food Nexus StudiesFrench-language works237,207