Climbing up the Waste Hierarchy: The Devil is in the Details
Bibliographic record
Abstract
According to the United Nations, the global human population generates an estimated 2.24 billion tons of Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) each year. The waste sector is having a significant impact on the triple planetary crisis of climate change, biodiversity loss and pollution. Although high-income countries only account for 17 percent of the world’s population, these same countries generate 34 percent of the world’s waste. Canada is only second to the United States in its per capita production of MSW, and is therefore a significant contributor to the triple planetary crisis. The Government of Canada recognizes the Waste Hierarchy (WH) as an instrument used to strategize and improve waste management practices. Best practices for the environment, human health and well-being prioritize waste reduction, reuse and repair while minimizing landfilling, energy recovery, and recycling. Three manuscripts using the WH as a common thread make up the chapters of this thesis. The first manuscript describes how waste is both governed and managed in Kingston, Ontario, Canada and gathers information from government websites, primary literature and semi-structured interviews with multiple stakeholders. An actualized WH for the City of Kingston is created to provide a visualization of the missing actions needed to impact the waste crisis. The second manuscript explores, through participatory observation, how landfill waste is reduced at a Kingston community arts and music festival. The limitations of scaling up the festival organizational structure to much larger festivals is discussed. The third manuscript, using the allegory of the (high-income earning) Three Little Pigs, explores the inaction of the straw-housers, the techno-fixes and circular economies of the wood-housers, and the implementation of a sustainable, shrinking economy through degrowth of the stone-housers to solve the waste crisis. A common thread throughout this research is that a stronger adherence to the WH is needed in all aspects of waste management. In order to reign in the amount of waste produced in high-income countries, top-down governing promoting reduce/reuse/repair initiatives needs to coincide with bottom-up responsible reduced consumption (ie: degrowth). Only in this way will we be able to climb the Waste Hierarchy and alleviate the current waste crisis.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".