MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983648177 · doi:10.1068/a4564

Voluntary Simplicity, Involuntary Complexities, and the Pull of Remove: The Radical Ruralities of off-Grid Lifestyles

2013· article· en· W1983648177 on OpenAlexaffabout
Phillip Vannini, Jonathan Taggart

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and Space · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsRoyal Roads University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimplicityGarbageDisconnectionEthnographySociologyElectricityGridEnvironmental ethicsAestheticsBusinessGeographyPolitical scienceEpistemologyEngineeringLawElectrical engineeringPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Why do residents of Western world live off-the-grid? This paper provides answers to this question. The expression ‘off-the-grid’, refers to the living condition of a household or a community lying outside the electricity infrastructure, but often also denotes disconnection from other infrastructures such as municipal water conduits, natural gas pipelines, road networks, garbage and waste collection, food supply chains, and telecommunications. Drawing from and contributing to the literatures on rural geographies and voluntary simplicity we argue that while off-gridders embrace values typical of the voluntary simplicity philosophy, their biographical and geographical trajectories reveal that living off-grids is not a clear and free choice. The performance of the mundane complexities typical of the lifestyle renders off-grid living a uniquely radical, but also contradictory and even paradoxical, constellation of practices through which new marginal spatialities are constituted. Drawing from ethnographic fragments culled from a multisited ethnographic project unfolding across Canada we present a thickly descriptive look into the motives and lifestyles of off-gridders living in the Yukon.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.018
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.173
Teacher spread0.163 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations50
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and SpaceSame topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207