OS CANUDOS PLÁSTICOS E SUAS POLÍTICAS PÚBLICAS DE REGULAMENTAÇÃO NOS PAÍSES AMERICANOS
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Plastic straws represent a small portion among the waste disposed by the population. However, they represent a significant portion of marine and coastal waste, being among the 10 most collected objects in clean-up activities. Since 2017, they have become amatter of worldwide concern and repercussion, to the point that legislations limiting or prohibiting them. However, these are still poorly documented in the scientific literature. The objective of this paper was to investigate, categorize, analyze and compare existing regulations in the American continent, so that best practices are proposed to assist in future decision making. Moreover, complementarily, technically analyze the materials of different drinking straws. An investigation was conducted from official government sources resulting in 240 regulations from different locations across the American continent (from Vancouver to Ushuaia), they were categorized and analyzed from 13 developed issues. We also technically analyzed three types of drinking straws from three scientific tests (DSC, TGA and FTIR). The results of the regulatory analysis found that most policies do not use technical standards in their legal obligations (82% of those related to biodegradability), were adopted in the period 2018/2019 (96%) and have no accessibility options (72%). Greater inclusion of academia is needed in environmental public policy making and a broader discussion for inclusion. The solution for plastic pollution goes far beyond specific solutions and needs to be broad, such as improving Urban Solid Waste management, acting in circular economy and environmental awareness.Plastic straws represent a small portion among the waste disposed by the population. However, they represent a significant portion of marine and coastal waste, being among the 10 most collected objects in clean-up activities. Since 2017, they have become amatter of worldwide concern and repercussion, to the point that legislations limiting or prohibiting them. However, these are still poorly documented in the scientific literature. The objective of this paper was to investigate, categorize, analyze and compare existing regulations in the American continent, so that best practices are proposed to assist in future decision making. Moreover, complementarily, technically analyze the materials of different drinking straws. An investigation was conducted from official government sources resulting in 240 regulations from different locations across the American continent (from Vancouver to Ushuaia), they were categorized and analyzed from 13 developed issues. We also technically analyzed three types of drinking straws from three scientific tests (DSC, TGA and FTIR). The results of the regulatory analysis found that most policies do not use technical standards in their legal obligations (82% of those related to biodegradability), were adopted in the period 2018/2019 (96%) and have no accessibility options (72%). Greater inclusion of academia is needed in environmental public policy making and a broader discussion for inclusion. The solution for plastic pollution goes far beyond specific solutions and needs to be broad, such as improving Urban Solid Waste management, acting in circular economy and environmental awareness. Plastic straws represent a small portion among the waste disposed by the population. However, they represent a significant portion of marine and coastal waste, being among the 10 most collected objects in clean-up activities. Since 2017, they have become amatter of worldwide concern and repercussion, to the point that legislations limiting or prohibiting them. However, these are still poorly documented in the scientific literature. The objective of this paper was to investigate, categorize, analyze and compare existing regulations in the American continent, so that best practices are proposed to assist in future decision making. Moreover, complementarily, technically analyze the materials of different drinking straws. An investigation was conducted from official government sources resulting in 240 regulations from different locations across the American continent (from Vancouver to Ushuaia), they were categorized and analyzed from 13 developed issues. We also technically analyzed three types of drinking straws from three scientific tests (DSC, TGA and FTIR). The results of the regulatory analysis found that most policies do not use technical standards in their legal obligations (82% of those related to biodegradability), were adopted in the period 2018/2019 (96%) and have no accessibility options (72%). Greater inclusion of academia is needed in environmental public policy making and a broader discussion for inclusion. The solution for plastic pollution goes far beyond specific solutions and needs to be broad, such as improving Urban Solid Waste management, acting in circular economy and environmental awareness. Plastic straws represent a small portion among the waste disposed by the population. However, they represent a significant portion of marine and coastal waste, being among However, they represent a significant portion of marine and coastal waste, being among the 10 most collected objects in clean-up activities. Since 2017, they have become a However, they represent a significant portion of marine and coastal waste, being among the 10 most collected objects in clean-up activities. Since 2017, they have become amatter of worldwide concern and repercussion, to the point that legislations limiting or or However, they represent a significant portion of marine and coastal waste, being among the 10 most collected objects in clean-up activities. Since 2017, they have become amatter of worldwide concern and repercussion, to the point that legislations limiting or prohibiting them. However, these are still poorly documented in the scientific literature. ture. The objective of this paper was to investigate, categorize, analyze and compare existing regulations in the American continent, so that best practices are proposed to assist in future decision making. Moreover, complementarily, technically analyze the materials of different drinking straws. An investigation was conducted from official government sources resulting in 240 regulations from different locations across the American continent (from Vancouver to Ushuaia), they were categorized and analyzed from 13 developed issues. We also technically analyzed three types of drinking straws from three scientific tests (DSC, TGA and FTIR). The results of the regulatory analysis found that most policies do not use technical standards in their legal obligations (82% of those related to biodegradability), were adopted in the period 2018/2019 (96%) and have no accessibility options (72%). Greater inclusion of academia is needed in environmental public policy making and a broader discussion for inclusion. The solution for plastic pollution goes far beyond specific solutions and needs to be broad, such as improving Urban Solid Waste management, acting in circular economy and environmental awareness.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".