MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2102154456 · doi:10.1177/1086026612440097

Transitioning From Endgame to Sustainability

2012· article· en· W2102154456 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

VenueOrganization & Environment · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental law and policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of ManitobaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonsGrassrootsSustainabilityCorporate governanceContext (archaeology)SociologyEnvironmental ethicsLaw and economicsPolitical scienceEconomicsLawEcologyManagementPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article engages with Peter Barnes’s work on commons trusts as a model to confront mounting social and ecological crises. The authors begin by locating Barnes’s model within the context of other approaches to this issue and by describing the main elements of his work and applying them to the case of carbon reduction strategies. Throughout, the article highlights the key strengths, limitations, and implications of Barnes’s model. Although Barnes offers a proposal for institutional change that could democratize decision making with a view to protecting the ecosphere, it does not go far enough to challenge the current capitalist order or in explaining how commons trusts would be protected from corporate influence. Implications include the connections between Barnes’s institutional model and a confederal model of global governance, as well as the potential of commons trusts to alter the practice of law and create new channels for ecological literacy and grassroots activism.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.744
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.243 · 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