Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35886620›Full record

ArticleInternational journal of environmental research and public health2022

Multi-Agent Evolutionary Game in the Recycling Utilization of Sulfate-Rich Wastewater.

Meng Ding, Hui Zeng

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in International journal of environmental research and public health, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Meng DingSchool of Urban Planning and Design, Shenzhen Graduate School, Peking University, Shenzhen 518055, China.
Hui ZengSchool of Urban Planning and Design, Shenzhen Graduate School, Peking University, Shenzhen 518055, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Current industrial development has led to an increase in sulfate-rich industrial sewage, threatening industrial ecology and the environment. Incorrectly treating high-concentration sulfate wastewater can cause serious environmental problems and even harm human health. Water with high sulfate levels can be treated as a resource and treated harmlessly to meet the needs of the circular economy. Today, governments worldwide are working hard to encourage the safe disposal and reuse of industrial salt-rich wastewater by recycling sulfate-rich wastewater (SRW) resources. However, the conflict of interests between the SRW production department, the SRW recycling department, and the governments often make it challenging to effectively manage sulfate-rich wastewater resources. This study aims to use the mechanism of evolutionary game theory (EGT) to conduct theoretical modelling and simulation analysis on the interaction of the behaviour of the above three participants. This paper focuses on the impact of government intervention and the ecological behaviour of wastewater producers on the behavioural decisions of recyclers. The results suggest that the government should play a leading role in developing the SRW resource recovery industry. SRW producers protect the environment in the mature stage, and recyclers actively collect and recover compliant sulfate wastewater resources. Governments should gradually deregulate and eventually withdraw from the market. Qualified recyclers and environmentally friendly wastewater producers can benefit from a mature SRW resources recovery industry.

Indexed as

SulfatesWastewaterGame TheoryHumansRecyclingSewageSulfur OxidesWaste Disposal, FluidSewageSulfatesSulfur OxidesWastewaterenvironmental supervisionevolutionary game theoryresources recoverysulfate-rich wastewater (SRW)tripartite gamewastewater management

Identifiers

PMID35886620
PMCPMC9323009

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.