MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414639897 · doi:10.1007/978-981-96-7933-1_5

The Wealth and Waste of Cities

2025· book-chapter· en· W4414639897 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel Hoornweg

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in 21st century human settlements · 2025
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMunicipal Solid Waste Management
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityExpansiveStock (firearms)Global warmingFossil fuelPetroleumHuman settlementResource (disambiguation)Climate change

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Per person, Canada uses more energy and generates more waste than any other country. Canada’s resource intensity is driven by two aspects. From the days of the first settlers, Canada was and is still seen as a land of resources to be mined, cut, channeled, harnessed, and shipped. And, Canada’s cities, benefiting from relatively cheap energy and lots of land, were developed with large homes on expansive lots in car-dependent neighborhoods. The urban metabolism of a Canadian city is among the world’s most voracious. Canada is doubly blessed by geography. The country is replete with minerals, freshwater, and petroleum resources. Almost half the world’s mining companies are listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange and Canada’s oil and gas reserves are the world’s third highest. Canada’s second geographic blessing is the temperate climate (with plentiful freshwater), which will be especially important for the remainder of this century as climate migrants move away from the equator. Canada’s blessings now need to be protected and shared. Canada’s cities will need to lead the global shift to a sustainability mindset where wealth can be increased while planetary impacts are decreased.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.884

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.008

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.252 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in 21st century human settlementsSame topicMunicipal Solid Waste ManagementFrench-language works237,207