An investigation on the operational resilience of the Canadian electronic product stewardship program and the recycling business characteristics
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electronic waste recycling companies have proliferated in many countries due to valuable materials present in end-of-life electronic and electrical equipment. This article examined the business characteristics and management performance of Electronic Products Recycling Association (EPRA), a Canadian nationwide electronic product stewardship organization. The organization's annual performance reports, from 2012 to 2020, for nine Canadian provinces in which it currently operates were aggregated and analyzed. Temporal analysis using regression and Mann-Kendall tests were employed, and five characteristics of EPRA's business were analyzed, including e-waste products collected, number of drop-off locations, efforts to build public awareness, operating expenses, and growth of e-waste stewardship. Results show a decline in the amount of e-waste collected across the provinces, except in New Brunswick, which started its program in 2017. The Mann-Kendall test revealed declining temporal trends in most provinces. Although the collection/drop off sites and stewardship organizations increased astronomically over the study period in Canada, the amounts of e-waste collected decreased. We found that public awareness generally did not increase the amount of e-waste collected, and these campaigns only appeared to be effective in jurisdictions with good accessibility of e-waste recycling. Processing cost accounted for the majority of the e-waste management budget in Canada, and different factors affected the financial success of the stewards differently.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".