From waste to sustainable development: Evaluating Canada’s waste management policies and Sustainable Development Goals progress
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This review article assesses the crucial role of waste management in Canada's pursuit of achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly Goals 6, 11, 12 and 13. By applying a structured literature review informed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) model, this study systematically identified the key waste management strategies and their alignment with the concerning targets of the SDGs. The study includes insights from academic publications, government reports and national performance data. The study's findings highlight both policy achievements and ongoing challenges, including regional disparities, low recycling rates and inadequate electronic waste management. The study concludes by emphasizing the need for uniform national strategies, stakeholder engagement and data-driven performance targets. This study contributes to the understanding of policy gaps and provides policy and research directions for advancing sustainability.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".