Unleashing circular economy potential in agriculture: Integrating social impact assessment with the <scp>ReSOLVE</scp> framework as a tool for sustainable development
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
Abstract The circular economy concept has grown in popularity in recent decades as a potential method to offset the waste produced by the linear economy model. In this study, the authors proposed an update to the ReSOLVE framework that includes social impacts and uses decision variables based on the ECOGRAI methodology to facilitate a system‐wide analysis to support sustainable decision‐making. After the updated framework was outlined, it was employed in a theoretical case study to evaluate the current state of the poultry industry and determine hotspots where circular economy metrics could be implemented to benefit affected stakeholders. While the poultry sector was used as a case study, the proposed framework can be applied with modified indicators in other agricultural sectors. This work demonstrated that decision makers can improve the agriculture sector's high social and environmental impact by applying a framework that integrates ReSOLVE circular economy principles and social impact assessment methods.
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it