MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Public preferences for marine plastic litter management across Europe

2022· article· en· W4308153131 on OpenAlexaff
Salma Khedr, Katrin Rehdanz, Roy Brouwer, P.J.H. van Beukering, Hanna Dijkstra, Sem Duijndam, Ikechukwu C. Okoli

Bibliographic record

VenueEcological Economics · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersHorizon 2020HORIZON EUROPE Framework Programme
KeywordsMarine Strategy Framework DirectiveWater Framework DirectiveWillingness to payMarine debrisEuropean unionPlastic pollutionEnvironmental resource managementNexus (standard)Contingent valuationDirectiveMacroEmpirical evidenceBaltic seaPublic economicsEnvironmental planningNatural resource economicsBusinessEconomicsEnvironmental scienceGeographyEcologyPollutionInternational tradeBiologyEngineeringWater quality

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plastic pollution is one of the most challenging problems affecting the marine environment of our time. Based on a unique dataset covering four European seas and eight European countries, this paper adds to the limited empirical evidence base related to the societal welfare effects of marine litter management. We use a discrete choice experiment to elicit public willingness-to-pay (WTP) for macro and micro plastic removal to achieve Good Environmental Status across European seas as required by the European Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Using a common valuation design and following best-practice guidelines, we draw comparisons between countries, seas and policy contexts. European citizens have strong preferences to improve the environmental status of the marine environment by removing and reducing both micro and macro plastic litter and implementing preventive measures favouring a pan-European approach. However, public WTP estimates differ significantly across European countries and seas. We explain why and discuss implications for policymaking.

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 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 score0.409
Threshold uncertainty score0.983

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.000

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.211
Teacher spread0.179 · 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 designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations25
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEcological EconomicsSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207