Sustainability and solid waste management in higher education: an inquiry into the composition and management of solid waste at the University of Northern British Columbia, Prince George campus
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Many institutions of higher education have come to recognize their unique role and responsibility in promoting an environmentally sustainable society. This recognition has led to countless institutional commitments to reduce the environmental impacts associated with campus operational, teaching and research activities. Solid waste is one of the more visible and tangible signs of consumption, thus offering a key starting point for launching a campus sustainability initiative. This study describes a campus waste characterization research project to identify opportunities for enhancing waste reduction, recycling and composting while improving the overall sustainability of a waste management program at a small, research intensive and geographically isolated university in western Canada. Components of this research study were a review of waste haulage records and university policies, a literature review and two waste audits. A waste characterization procedure was used to assess solid waste generation and composition across various campus locations during two 5-day periods over consecutive winter and fall semesters in 2008. The results provide insights and baseline data for targeting specific materials and locations that represent the greatest potential for waste minimization and diversion. This project report also provides recommendations for the university administration to enhance the efficiency and sustainability of campus waste management systems and for becoming a more sustainable educational institute. --P.ii.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".