MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408436812 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-7033

Uncollected Urban Plastic Waste in Bandung: A Geo-Referenced Material Flow Analysis Revealing Spatial Inequalities and Management Challenges

2025· preprint· en· W4408436812 on OpenAlexaff
Giulia Frigo, Claudia R. Binder, Gregory Giuliani, Christian Zurbrügg

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMunicipal Solid Waste Management
Canadian institutionsFuture Earth
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterial flow analysisInequalityFlow (mathematics)GeographyEngineeringMathematicsWaste managementGeometry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With an ever-increasing population and growing consumption, plastic waste management has become one of the most challenging global problems. Both mismanagement and illegal dumping pose significant environmental and public health risks, leading to severe issues such as the release of harmful chemicals and heavy metals into the air through burning, and significant ocean pollution from riverine plastic discharge. Indonesia is estimated to be one of the top emitters of riverine plastics and a significant portion of the country’s municipal solid waste is either burned or uncollected. Despite the recognized importance of tackling mismanaged plastic waste, comprehensive data on plastic waste flow remain largely unavailable. This study presents a plastic Material Flow Analysis (MFA) in Bandung, Indonesia, using a bottom-up, geo-referenced approach to tackle the absence of data.Our methodology involves quantifying the volume of uncollected waste and identifying its specific locations through georeferenced mapping and spatial analysis. The findings reveal that household plastic waste consumption ranges from 14 to 20 kg per capita per year. On average, over 50% of plastic waste is sent to landfills, 20-25% is source-separated and recycled, 12% remains uncollected, and 1-2% is burned. Limited infrastructure and collection capacity result in higher rates of uncollected waste and burning. These mismanaged waste hotspots are often located near riverbanks or open spaces adjacent to households.Accessibility analysis indicates that areas with higher uncollected waste are farther from waste collection points and lack adequate infrastructure, including roads and transport systems, increasing reliance on informal disposal methods such as burning and dumping. This suggests that mismanaged waste is not only an environmental issue but also a predictor of social inequalities within cities, as affected communities often face poor living conditions and inadequate access to basic services such as clean water. By providing data-driven insights and actionable recommendations, this research contributes to the development of sustainable and equitable waste management strategies in Indonesia. Furthermore, this study tests the utility of applying a bottom-up georeferenced Material Flow Analysis to measure plastic waste flows, contributing to the growing body of research in this field.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.064
Threshold uncertainty score0.127

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207