MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408201373 · doi:10.1038/s43247-025-02105-7

Plastics matter in the food system

2025· review· en· W4408201373 on OpenAlexaff
Joe Yates, Megan Deeney, Jane Muncke, Bethanie Carney Almroth, Marie‐France Dignac, Arturo Castillo Castillo, Winnie Courtene‐Jones, Suneetha Kadiyala, Eva Kumar, Peter Stoett, Mengjiao Wang, Trisia Farrelly

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications Earth & Environment · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
FundersForeign and Commonwealth OfficeInnovative Methods and Metrics for Agriculture and Nutrition ActionsGovernment of the United KingdomBill and Melinda Gates Foundation
KeywordsEnvironmental scienceBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Agriculture and food systems are major sources of plastic pollution but they are also vulnerable to their diverse lifecycle impacts. However, this problem is not well-recognized in global policy and scientific discourse, agendas, and monitoring of food systems. The United Nations-led Global Plastics Treaty, which has been under negotiation since 2022, is a critical opportunity to address pollution across the entire plastics lifecycle for more sustainable and resilient food systems. Here, we offer aspirational indicators for future monitoring of food systems' plastics related to (1) plastic polymers and chemicals, (2) land use, (3) trade and waste, and (4) environmental and human health. We call for interdisciplinary research collaborations to continue improving and harmonising the evidence base necessary to track and trace plastics and plastic chemicals in food systems. We also highlight the need for collaboration across disciplines and sectors to tackle this urgent challenge for biodiversity, climate change, food security and nutrition, health and human rights at a whole systems level.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.016

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations22
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications Earth & EnvironmentSame topicAgriculture Sustainability and Environmental ImpactFrench-language works237,207