Power, Knowledge, and Public Engagement: Constructing ‘Citizenship’ in Alberta's Industrial Heartland
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Foucault's concept of governmentality has provided the basis for recent analysis of governance that explains the connections between power and knowledge in the formation of subjects in advanced liberal societies. In this paper, we apply this concept to help to understand the persistent conflict and power struggles that are characteristic of contemporary public engagement in environmental planning, using the case study of a regional land use plan known as Alberta's Industrial Heartland. Drawing on document and media analysis and key stakeholder interviews carried out between 2002 and 2003, we describe how several ‘technologies of citizenship’ were deployed and ultimately resisted in a public engagement program that attempted to prescribe the terms of reference for public participation. The findings support a view that sees public engagement less as a tool for promoting democratic consensus and more as means to legitimate particular forms of governance that privilege narrowly defined economic goals at the expense of citizen rights and 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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it