MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412188433 · doi:10.1017/plc.2025.10019

A circular plastic economy should account for all societal costs

2025· article· en· W4412188433 on OpenAlexaff
Kristian Syberg, Sedat Gündoğdu, Tara Olsen, Doris Knoblauch, Nikoline Oturai, Tony R. ‎Walker, Ellen Palm, Thomas Budde Christensen, Neil Tangri

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge Prisms Plastics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsDalhousie University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCircular economyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract One of the fundamental challenges for the UN plastics treaty is to shift the current linear plastic economy into a more circular plastic economy. Transitioning to a circular plastic economy requires a profound transformation of socio-technical systems, and research suggests that disruptive policies must simultaneously destabilize the entrenched linear system and cultivate a new regime that supports circular business models. A major barrier to this transformation lies in the artificially low cost of primary plastics, maintained by substantial subsidies for fossil fuels and plastic production. These subsidies, alongside the failure to internalize negative externalities – such as extensive health impacts and environmental damage – mask the true cost of plastic use, thereby undermining the economic case for innovation in sustainable alternatives. The upcoming UN plastics treaty presents a unique opportunity to realign market incentives and drive the necessary transition toward a circular, regenerative plastic economy.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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 venueCambridge Prisms PlasticsSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207