MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403467379 · doi:10.56367/oag-044-11589

The hidden climate cost: Food loss, waste, and greenhouse gas emissions

2024· article· en· W4403467379 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen Access Government · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicFood Waste Reduction and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsMcGill UniversityDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreenhouse gasFood wasteEnvironmental scienceWaste managementClimate changeNatural resource economicsEnvironmental engineeringEnvironmental protectionEconomicsEcologyEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hidden climate cost: Food loss, waste, and greenhouse gas emissions Professor Gordon Price from Dalhousie University and Professor Grant Clark from McGill University study the hidden climate change costs of food loss and waste in Canada. Here, they highlight the need for greater cooperation and data sharing. What connects a meal left uneaten, crops left to rot in the field, and spoiled produce buried in a landfill? They all contribute to the more than one billion tonnes of food that is lost or wasted globally every year (UNEP, 2024). Food loss and waste (FLW) is an important source of greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs) and consequently a driver of climate change. The intertwined relationship between food policy, production, and consumption requires that government, industry, and consumers take immediate and collective action to reduce FLW and its environmental impact.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.980
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.274 · 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