Global Circular Economy Practice: Drivers, Barriers and Strategies for Food System in Indonesia
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
The urgent need to overhaul food systems towards more regenerative, inclusive, and sustainable approaches has become a critical concern, particularly with the goal of providing healthy food for a global population that will exceed 9 billion by 2050 and an Indonesian population that will reach 300 million.With the current destructive agricultural framework, significant environmental damage is not the only consequence; there is also a decline in social quality within Indonesia's rural and urban communities.This study aims to design a circular economy implementation strategy formulated through SWOT analysis in order to build a sustainable food system in Indonesia.The research methods used are Systematic Literature Review (SLR), Pareto analysis, and SWOT analysis.The results of this SWOT analysis were used as recommendations to develop Indonesia's food system with a circular economy approach, similar to what has been developed at the global level This SWOT strategy shows that by leveraging existing strengths, addressing weaknesses, capitalizing on opportunities, and overcoming threats, Indonesia can develop a more sustainable and resilient food system through a circular economy approach.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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