MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408893187 · doi:10.3390/environments12040101

Determinants of the Use of Circular Economy Strategies by Stakeholders in the Wood–Forestry Sector in Benin

2025· article· en· W4408893187 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.

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironments · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicSustainable Supply Chain Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsForestryBusinessCircular economyCommunity forestryNatural resource economicsForest managementGeographyEconomicsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although the circular economy (CE) has emerged as an innovative approach to address the challenges of protecting natural resources, the use of its strategies remains in its infancy, particularly in West Africa. This study examines the factors influencing the use of CE strategies in the wood and forestry sector in Benin. This study relied on a methodological approach based on surveys, using interview guides to collect information in both the southern and northern zones of the country. This information was collected at the level of the different actors directly involved in this sector, to identify the factors that influence the use of CE strategies using Probit models. The results show that access to information, the number of years of professional experience, the age of the actors and the type of training received are the determining factors in the use of these strategies (the models statistically significant at the 1% level). Other factors, such as knowledge of the costs and benefits of different strategies, are also identified as fundamental. Furthermore, a high financial capacity and an excess or overload of information are identified as the limiting factors for the use of these strategies.

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.086
Threshold uncertainty score0.415

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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.179 · 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