MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392896770 · doi:10.1061/9780784485279.007

A Transition Management Framework for Implementing Circular Economy in the Construction Industry

2024· article· en· W4392896770 on OpenAlexaff
Aida Mollaei, Guilherme Eliote, Beatriz Guerra, Sheida Shahi, Fernanda Leite, Carl T. Haas, Olaf Weber

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCircular economyTransition (genetics)ExternalityBusinessTransition management (governance)Construction industryIndustrial organizationEconomic systemEconomyEngineeringEconomicsConstruction engineeringMicroeconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Construction contributes to around half of global material consumption and solid waste generation. Transitioning to a circular economy is a potential solution to mitigate negative environmental externalities. Nonetheless, this transition is challenged by various technical and socio-economic factors. To identify a viable path for a circular economy transition, the overarching objective of this research was to build on transition theory and identify drivers, motivations, challenges, and efforts in shifting to a circular economy in the construction industry. For this purpose, semi-structured interviews were conducted with representatives from 13 construction companies in North America and Europe, including owners, contractors, and manufacturers, who are actively implementing circular economy principles. Interview findings were summarized, and a four-step transition management cycle framework for the transition to a circular economy in the construction sector was proposed. Findings are useful in managing the transition from a linear to a circular model in the construction sector.

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)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.232 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSustainable Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207