MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3203032603 · doi:10.26686/pq.v17i2.6825

Foxes Guarding the Hen House?

2021· article· en· W3203032603 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Quarterly · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEnvironmental Sustainability in Business
Canadian institutionsInstitute on Governance
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStewardship (theology)Product (mathematics)BusinessGovernment (linguistics)Environmental stewardshipOrder (exchange)FaithCircular economyEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental resource managementEconomicsPolitical scienceFinanceLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

For the first time since the enactment of the Waste Minimisation Act 2008, New Zealand is applying regulated (or mandatory) product stewardship to several priority products. By making those who manufacture, sell and use products responsible for minimising the waste those products cause, well-designed product stewardship schemes can act as a critical tool in the transition to a circular economy. However, the New Zealand government has put its faith in industry to lead scheme design. Such an approach threatens to vitiate robust, ambitious schemes and foreground industry interests over those of wider society and the natural environment. This article juxtaposes the radical potential of product stewardship against the probable outcome of industry-led schemes, and recommends reforms that the minister for the environment should pursue in order to shift the dial towards more inclusive design of product stewardship schemes.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.221 · 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