MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408410874 · doi:10.3390/f16030508

The Circular Economy: A Lever for the Sustainable Development of the Wood and Forestry Sector in West Africa

2025· article· en· W4408410874 on OpenAlexaff
Yann Emmanuel Miassi, Nancy Gélinas, Kossivi Fabrice Dossa

Bibliographic record

VenueForests · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestrySustainable developmentLeverAgroforestryBusinessGeographyEngineeringEcologyEnvironmental scienceBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The circular economy (CE) has emerged as an innovative response to the challenges of economic growth and environmental protection. This study aims to establish a portrait of the circular economy within the wood forestry sector in Benin. The methodology includes field surveys through structured interviews in the southern and northern zones and a documentary analysis. Data were collected from direct and political stakeholders to assess their knowledge and practices. A discourse analysis, focusing on internal factors, was used to understand and analyze the motivations of local actors in the use of CE strategies. The results show that the most used strategies are maintenance and repair (52.38%), followed by donation and resale (18%). The motivations mentioned by the actors in the two zones are mainly economic (improving income and limiting expenses) and social (esthetic). However, if most of the actors do not perceive limits to these strategies, others highlight certain weaknesses, including the long process of transforming used goods (19.69%) and the loss of quality of recycled materials (15.44%). To address these weaknesses, alternative strategies, such as eco-design, optimization of operations, loan-exchange, and industrial ecology, are proposed.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.638
Threshold uncertainty score0.513

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueForestsSame topicSustainable Supply Chain ManagementFrench-language works237,207