MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Adoption and diffusion of marine litter clean-up technologies across European seas: Legal, institutional and financial drivers and barriers

2021· review· en· W3166229748 on OpenAlexafffund
Sofia Frantzi, Roy Brouwer, Emma Watkins, P.J.H. van Beukering, Maria da Conceição Cunha, Hanna Dijkstra, Sem Duijndam, Héla Jaziri, Ikechukwu C. Okoli, Mia Pantzar, Ignacio Rada Cotera, Katrin Rehdanz, Karsten Seidel, George Triantaphyllidis

Bibliographic record

VenueMarine Pollution Bulletin · 2021
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersEuropean CommissionHorizon 2020Ministry of Environment - Saskatchewan
KeywordsMarine debrisLegislationLitterBusinessEnforcementBaltic seaEnvironmental resource managementMarine Strategy Framework DirectiveEmerging technologiesEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental planningGeographyEnvironmental sciencePolitical scienceEcologyOceanographyEcosystemDebrisBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study reviews existing legal, institutional and policy tools and frameworks, relevant to the introduction and adoption of new marine litter clean-up technologies in two regional European seas, the Mediterranean and the Baltic. A combination of desk studies in six countries bordering the Baltic (Estonia, Germany, Sweden) and the Mediterranean (Greece, Italy, Tunisia), and interviews with experts and stakeholders, is used to identify key drivers and barriers to the adoption and diffusion of marine litter technologies. The main conclusion of the study is that the most influential pieces of legislation relevant to marine litter management are top-down EU policies, often forming the basis of regional and national plans. Moreover, the study finds that several drivers of marine litter technologies may at the same time be critical barriers. These factors include public awareness, consumer behaviour, enforcement of legislation, and the rise of SMEs engaged in recycling and eco-labelling of marine litter.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.996
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.213 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
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

Citations48
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMarine Pollution BulletinSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207