Bibliometric Analysis of Current Status of Circular Economy during 2012–2021: Case of Foods
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food is usually recognized as a limited resource in sustainability, recognized by the United Nations (UN) Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) 2, which aims to achieve zero hunger. It is expected that the circular economy (CE) can improve processes related to food production. The objective of the present study was to apply a bibliometric approach using VOSviewer visualization software as a research tool to analyze the relevant literature from the Scopus database in the field of circular economy and its relation to improvements in food issues throughout 2012–2021. A total of 1316 articles were analyzed. Italy was the most productive country with 313 articles, with Wageningen University & Research the organization with the most publications with 39 articles. The top 10 institutions originated from Italy, The Netherlands, France, and Denmark. Sustainability was the most productive journal with 107 articles. Bioresource Technology had the highest average citation frequency (44.68). The study helps initiate investigations to adapt the results obtained and create new strategies for increasing food circular economy efforts.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.062 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 it