<i>New Allies for Nature and Culture:</i> Exploring Common Ground for a Just and Sustainable Chicago Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The environmental justice movement (EJM) has long focused on the intersections between environmental and social issues. Recently, movements linking these issues have been gaining momentum around the world. This article examines an initiative called New Allies for Nature and Culture that has been promoting the integration of environmental and social justice work in the Chicago region. Led by the Division of Environment, Culture, and Conservation (ECCo) at The Field Museum with two partners, Lake County Forest Preserves and Friends of Ryerson Woods, New Allies involved a year of applied anthropological research followed by a series of gatherings that brought together representatives from diverse organizations across the Chicago region. The research identified five common concerns shared by environmental and social justice organizations: health and food, youth development, arts/creative practices, economic development, and climate change. It also identified three models for connecting social and environmental issues: creating “communities of choice,” environmental projects as holistic approaches, and linking nature and cultural heritage. New Allies' initial impact on the work of the three project partners suggests that these issues and models have the potential to build stronger relationships between organizations working on social and environmental issues. The article concludes by exploring some implications of these growing integrated movements for the EJM. Briefly the implications point toward opportunities for the EJM to expand its influence as “translation” experts and promote just sustainability, as well as to evolve from a reactive movement to a movement that promotes a radical change in our system of values.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.000 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".