MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412436563 · doi:10.2471/b09367

Open waste burning – sectoral solutions for air pollution and health

2025· book· en· W4412436563 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Health Organization eBooks · 2025
Typebook
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMunicipal Solid Waste Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean CommissionForeign, Commonwealth and Development OfficeMedical Research CouncilSouth African Medical Research CouncilUniversity of the West of EnglandNorth Carolina State UniversityImperial College LondonAgencia Española de Cooperación Internacional para el DesarrolloUNICEFUniversity of Massachusetts AmherstGovernment of the United KingdomUnited States Agency for International Development
KeywordsWaste managementPollutionEnvironmental scienceAir pollutionBusinessEnvironmental planningEngineeringChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Case study: Phasing out coal-fired electric power generation in Canada Open waste burningsectoral solutions for air pollution and health Technical brief Key messagesReducing open waste burning is essential for achieving clean air, clean energy access, climate change mitigation and health and well-being.Globally, over 2 billion tonnes of waste are produced annually.Household waste usually comprises a variety of materials including glass, plastics, metals, cardboard, paper, polystyrene, and organic matter such as food and garden waste.Infrequently, demolition waste, household chemicals or tyres may be included.Open waste burning may occur at major landfills, small or remote dumpsites, individual households or in streets.Emissions from open waste burning include various air pollutants, some of which may have more harmful climate and health impacts.Short-and long-term exposure to these pollutants result in adverse health effects such as coughing, dermatological symptoms, respiratory diseases and other health outcomes.Some household waste is collected and managed appropriately while uncollected waste is often burned, especially in low-and middle-income countries (LMICs), but also in rural areas regardless of country income.Waste burned at the household level is usually due to a nonexistent or poor municipal solid waste collection and waste management system.This is often the case in informal settlements and rural areas where the return on investment in collection facilities is poor.To compound this issue there may be a lack of awareness of the associated adverse health impacts as well as embedded cultural practices.Other reasons behind burning refuse, particularly in LMICs, may be to support livelihoods such as retrieval of metals from electrical items or to generate heat for food preparation or warmth, especially in regions with poor access to clean energy solutions. Air Quality, Energy and Health Science and Policy SummariesOpen waste burning -sectoral solutions for air pollution and health: Technical brief Overview Open waste burning and its health impactsOver 2 billion tonnes of waste are generated globally each year (1).In 2012, the estimated amount of waste generated in lower income countries was 0.6 kg/capita/day; in high-income countries it was 2.1 kg/capita/day (2).Due to the heterogeneous nature of household waste, the emissions from burning it differ in composition (3).This makes it difficult to accurately quantify pollutants emitted during waste burning.The management of domestic waste differs greatly depending on region and, most importantly, country income level.

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)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.763
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueWorld Health Organization eBooksSame topicMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207