Co-Creation, Interpretations and Engagement with a Movement-Based Symbol for Climate Justice: A Qualitative Inquiry
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The climate crisis demonstrates with complete clarity the need for massive systems-level changes towards far more sustainable societies. Global and local emissions need to decline rapidly to mitigate intensifying climate breakdown, accompanied by climate and sustainability solutions, to secure a far more stable, safe, and just future for all people and all life. Within these changes, engaging in our communities is essential to support and co-create broader solutions to help advance more sustainable societies, reduce negative impacts of a changing climate, and to move towards cultures and systems that recognize natural limits and centre care for people and planet. ‘Climate justice’ (CJ) can be seen as one powerful concept, call-to-action, and critical framing that has increased in use by many people and movements worldwide in response to the climate crisis. CJ shows promise for engaging communities in co-developing more ethical, justice-based responses to climate change that centre commitments to more environmentally conscious, climate safe societies that are also more caring and equitable. Now a globally-resonant discourse and symbol championed by many people, CJ has become a symbolic ‘signpost’ for how we “should” collectively respond as societies to the climate crisis. CJ has been linked to diverse concepts including ‘just transitions’ to more sustainable social and economic systems; culture change; the collective right to a safe climate future; historical and present responsibilities for climate change; visioning of alternative futures; acting in solidarity with and in defense of those most vulnerable to climate change impacts, including people and nature; and other related concepts. As is clear from culture theory and semiotics, symbols are a core part of shaping culture and can play a powerful role in shaping local and global cultural responses to crisis. Given the increasing use of CJ symbols in the public sphere, multiple scholars have expressed a need to better understand the potential effects of these symbols as ‘directional signposts’, including their influences on shaping culture, perceptions of CJ, and potentially motivating related CJ actions. This study addresses this gap, by investigating the impacts of a unique local phenomenon of twenty-one identical CJ signposts that have been raised by faith communities in and beyond Waterloo Region, Canada, supported by a local volunteer group Faith Climate Justice Waterloo Region (FCJWR). Through a process of engaging key informants in semi-structured interviews, this study explores the novel phenomenon of local organizers co-creating a CJ signpost, then raised by local faith communities on different places of faith – and the resulting interpretations, meanings, reflections, and responses to this signpost that were shared. Novel insights include exploring how specific value communities engage with CJ symbols; the importance of process to effective CJ symbol co-creation; interpretations and perceived impacts of the CJ symbol; and anticipated ‘next steps’ for engagement, among others. Lastly, this study takes a uniquely interdisciplinary approach to connect diverse bodies of knowledge, with significant implications for theory, research, and practice of climate justice communication across different contexts and scales.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,053 | 0,068 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,004 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,022 | 0,062 |
| Communication savante | 0,018 | 0,019 |
| Science ouverte | 0,004 | 0,019 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,006 | 0,011 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,005 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».