MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408252495 · doi:10.1016/j.envdev.2025.101195

Life cycle-based environmental, social, and economic assessment of waste printed circuit board management in isolated island areas: A case study in British Columbia, Canada

2025· article· en· W4408252495 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.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironmental Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicRecycling and Waste Management Techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ReginaConcordia UniversityUniversity of Victoria
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaConcordia University
KeywordsPrinted circuit boardColumbia universityOn boardEnvironmental resource managementBusinessEnvironmental scienceGeographyArchaeologyEngineeringSociologyElectrical engineeringMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The rapid increase in the use of electronic equipment has led to a significant rise in waste printed circuit boards (WPCBs), which can pose severe environmental risks if not properly managed. This study evaluates the environmental, social, and economic performances of four WPCB management scenarios for island communities, using a comprehensive framework that combines Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) and Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis (MCDA). When constructing the scenarios, scenario 1 considered the mechanical separation of WPCBs with subsequent recycling of the metallic fractions and direct landfilling of the non-metallic fractions. In scenario 2, compared to scenario 1, the non-metallic fractions are incinerated before landfilling. Scenarios 3 and 4 involve the direct incineration and direct landfilling of the entire WPCBs, respectively. The results indicate that scenario 1 is the most favorable option. It yields the highest positive environmental (-4,720 kg CO 2 eq. per tonne of WPCBs) and social (-30,679 ELU per tonne of WPCBs) impact while remaining economically viable. In contrast, scenario 3 exhibits the most significant negative impacts across all subcategories, and one-tonne WPCBs can contribute 2,750 kg CO 2 eq. and 729 ELU in environmental and social perspectives in this case, respectively. The study emphasizes the importance of metal recovery processes in achieving sustainable WPCB management and provides critical insights for policymakers and waste management professionals in isolated island areas. This framework offers a robust tool for optimizing WPCB disposal systems, balancing the trade-offs between environmental sustainability, social impacts, and economic costs, and guiding future practices and policies in e-waste management. • Precious metals recovered from WPCBs offer considerable economic benefits. • Metal recovery and incineration significantly affect WPCB disposal impacts. • On islands, shorter transport distances and higher recycling rates are optimal. • Incineration and landfilling are simpler but do not provide long-term sustainability.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.433
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.209 · 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