MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411069916 · doi:10.1017/plc.2025.10004

Atmospheric microplastics must be addressed in the global plastics treaty

2025· article· en· W4411069916 on OpenAlex
Justine Ammendolia, Deonie Castle, Kelsey Richardson, Tony R. ‎Walker

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.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge Prisms Plastics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMicroplasticsTreatyEnvironmental scienceOceanographyPolitical scienceLawGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The goal of the Global Plastics Treaty is to “end plastic pollution and to protect human and environmental health.” Despite overwhelming evidence of the adverse impacts of microplastics on human and environmental health, the inclusion of how microplastics will be addressed within the Global Plastics Treaty remains unclear. Yet, a contaminant as morphologically and chemically diverse as microplastics should be considered a priority for regulation under the Global Plastics Treaty like the 1979 Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution (CLRTAP). As the goal of finalizing the Global Plastics Treaty at INC-5 was not realized, a valuable opportunity to push for more inclusion and objectives that include atmospheric microplastics exists. To ensure that atmospheric microplastics are present within the Global Plastics Treaty text, the following are recommended. Ensure that inclusion of terms “air” and/or “atmosphere” and/or “atmospheric microplastics” be present alongside other environmental compartments like terrestrial and aquatic (marine and freshwater) environments. Capping plastic production is critical to reducing subsequent microplastic pollution. Improving product design or developing microplastic capture technologies should be prioritized for plastic products known to contribute to atmospheric microplastic pollution. Empirical targets should be established to mitigate emissions of atmospheric microplastics from “leaky” regions (e.g., urban centres and industrial regions), and targets should also be placed on activities that result in generation and release of secondary microplastics (e.g., dryer emissions and automotive tires). A framework to reduce pollution should be informed by the structure of other relevant successful multilateral air pollution agreements (e.g., the Montreal Protocol and CLRTAP), and goals should be informed by the present science and data obtained from monitoring. A global network of atmospheric monitoring observatories should be established to identify “leaky” regions or sources/activities and monitor temporal changes in microplastic concentrations via long-range processes. Establish specialized working groups of global experts that can develop and harmonize atmospheric microplastic monitoring and analytical methods. Assess effectiveness of mitigation and reduction strategies for atmospheric microplastics in relation to the empirical targets established by the Global Plastics Treaty. Additionally, atmospheric microplastics can be used as a metric to ensure that broader scale changes to pollution reduction strategies implemented by the Global Plastics Treaty are effective.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.281
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.217 · 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