Le « zéro déchet », tou(te)s dans le même bocal ? Profils, pratiques, et formes d’engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Deux sociologues et un consultant en environnement proposent un retour sur l’enquête « Bien vivre en zéro déchet » qu’ils ont réalisée pour l'ADEME en 2016. Par l’analyse des profils de 643 personnes s’identifiant au terme « zéro déchet » et une enquête ethnographique sur les pratiques quotidiennes et l’engagement de 12 foyers, ils montrent comment la démarche rassemble des individus aux motivations, pratiques, et profils sociaux variés, malgré une majorité de femmes jeunes issues de classes supérieures. Ces foyers zéro déchet, porteurs de changement, forment progressivement un levier d’action pour les institutions environnementales. Cette mobilisation soulève néanmoins des enjeux sociaux tels que l’inégale répartition des richesses et du travail, que le zéro déchet n’a pas mis en bocal.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".