MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041207891 · doi:10.1177/0309132510376849

The limits of ‘neoliberal natures’: Debating green neoliberalism

2010· article· en· W2041207891 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueProgress in Human Geography · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographies of human-animal interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNeoliberalism (international relations)ScholarshipDoctrineSociologyPoliticsCommodityPolitical economyPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsSocial scienceEconomicsLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper presents a meta-analysis of recent critiques of geographical scholarship on ‘neoliberal natures’. The analysis juxtaposes distinct (and at times divergent) conceptualizations of neoliberalism — as political doctrine, as economic project, as regulatory practice, or as process of governmentalization — and also of nature — as primary commodity, as resource, as ecosystem service, or as socio-natural assemblage. Strategies for developing a more systematic account of the variegation of neoliberal natures are discussed, with the goal of provoking scholars of neoliberal natures to reflect upon their core conceptual and methodological commitments, while contributing to broader debates over neoliberalism and the ‘nature of nature’.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.124
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.341
Teacher spread0.321 · 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