MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378907877 · doi:10.59100/2023.20.1.11-19

THE ONE MILLION TUMBLER MOVEMENT: STATE CIVIL SERVANTS’ PERCEPTION ON TUMBLER USE AND PLASTIC WASTE REDUCTION

2023· article· en· W4378907877 on OpenAlexaff
Ane Dwi Septina, Surendro Pradipto, Mirna Aulia Pribadi

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Analisis Kebijakan Kehutanan · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWaste Management and Recycling
Canadian institutionsEncana (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivil servantsGovernment (linguistics)EngineeringPublic relationsCivil engineeringPolitical scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One of the Indonesian government's steps to overcome the plastic waste problem is by initiating The One Million Tumbler Movement campaign. Civil Servants as government agents must have good knowledge and apply this policy in their lives and their environment. This is a case study approach through in-depth interviews, field observation, and literature study. The informant of this study was The Center for Standardization of Disaster and Climate Change Instruments (PUSAT-SIKBPI) civil servants with structural and functional career backgrounds. The result showed that the civil servants have knowledge about plastic waste reduction and have a supportive perception of tumbler use. The Center for Standardization of Disaster and Climate Change Instruments’ management supports the tumbler's use as a new habit related to The One Million Tumbler Movement campaign. The family values on environment characterize the tumbler and plastic bag uses in general. However, although civil servants’ environmental awareness has formed, the Covid-19 pandemic has made plastic consumption unavoidable. Support from the environment (The management and the family environment) is essential to help civil servants continue habitual implementation of tumbler use and the plastic awareness movement in general.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.198 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Analisis Kebijakan KehutananSame topicWaste Management and RecyclingFrench-language works237,207