MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3215211340 · doi:10.82308/43401

More powerful together: collaborative theorizing with social movements about decolonizing and decarbonizing Canada

2020· article· en· W3215211340 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Jennifer Gobby

Notice bibliographique

RevueeScholarship@McGill (McGill) · 2020
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueQualitative Research Methods and Ethics
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésSocial movementSociologyGender studiesPolitical sciencePolitics

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

While the climate and inequality crises intensify in Canada, the federal government continues to approve pipelines and other oil and gas projects, violating commitments to both climate action and reconciliation with Indigenous nations. In response to this, grassroots groups, non-governmental organizations, and Indigenous communities are working hard to contest these projects and the colonial capitalist logics that underlie them. This thesis reports on four years of qualitative research developed and conducted in collaboration with people actively involved in the Indigenous land defense, climate/environmental justice, and anti-pipeline movements in Canada.The research explores, as a first central theme, the ways that movement actors understand the crises and their underlying causes and how they envision the worlds they want. People in these movements are seeing that climate change and inequality are both driven by colonial capitalism, which is undergirded by western worldviews that promote domination of people over nature and of people over other people. These systems have bred systemic disconnection from land and from each other, cutting us off from the communities, tools, and knowledges we need to get ourselves out of this mess. Their visions of the worlds they want conjure up a future of flourishing networks of decentralized, self-determining communities, powered by renewable energy, and learning from the land. This is a future where a hard process of decolonizing relations renders us all much more capable of living and making decisions together – decisions that benefit all beings. This future depends on a fundamental restructuring of our systems and a massive redistribution of wealth, power, and land.A second major theme of this work is the ways that people conceptualize how large-scale change happens. This theme is engaged first through a literature review of theories of change (TOCs) from various bodies of academic literature including Indigenous scholarship, Historical Materialism, Intersectional Feminism, Social Movement Studies, and Social-Ecological Systems Transformation. This thesis also brings together the TOCs held by activists in these movements. Though their TOCs are diverse and conflicting at times, when brought together, they emphasize that transformation happens through a complex convergence of 1) the contexts in which we act, 2) people’s understanding, worldviews, and values and 3) building power through collective action and directing that power in various ways. 4) Undergirding these 3 factors is how we relate to each other and how all our efforts combine in mutually supporting ways. The third major theme in this thesis examines the obstacles to change being faced. Activists and land defenders identified barriers that are external to the movement, including lack of public will, the capitalist-driven economic system, corporate influence over public decision-making, criminalization of activists, and others. People I spoke with also identified barriers more internal to the movements. These include fragmentation, internal tensions, the trends towards NGOization, hierarchical, centralized organizing structures, as well as the insular, overly-critical activist culture and activist burn-out. This project culminates in a collective strategizing on what can be done to overcome the barriers and increase the transformative power of these movements to successfully contest and weaken colonial capitalism and offer viable and inspiring alternatives. To overcome all these daunting barriers, we need much bigger, much stronger movements and to do so we need to develop more capacity for thinking and working across differences. A shared understanding that emerges from all the chapters is that forging stronger, more just relations within and across movements is crucial for strengthening our collective ability to bring radical change to Canada’s economic, political, and social systems

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,004
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Études des sciences et des technologies
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,817
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0040,004
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0040,001
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,058
Tête enseignante GPT0,361
Écart entre enseignants0,303 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations5
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueeScholarship@McGill (McGill)Même sujetQualitative Research Methods and EthicsTravaux en français237 207