State—Capital Relations in Voluntary Environmental Improvement
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
The relationship between the environment and society is an increasingly prevalent theme in the study of contemporary social systems, with research often focused on the interactions between capital, environmental non-governmental organizations (ENGOs) and the state. Ecological Marxist and ecological modernizationist lines of enquiry, for example, both presume that close relations between states and environmental organizations will increase the likelihood of substantive state environmental action. Both also highlight the central role of state—capital relations in environmental transformation, although the latter views this relationship as potentially facilitative, while the former accords a much greater likelihood for environmental degradation resulting from close state—capital relations. Using interview data from a case study of natural resource management in Alberta, the article examines the role of state—capital relations in voluntary environmental improvement efforts. The findings suggest that capital sectors each have a distinct relationship with the state, neither of which abides closely with ecological modernizationist or ecological Marxist conceptions of state—capital relations. The natural resource regulatory regime itself, furthermore, has proven to constrain voluntary environmental improvement efforts, and the marginalization of ENGOs in the environmental policy community has limited the political consideration of alternative development paths. Finally, complexities within the state itself are identified, illustrating significant differences in incentives, costs and relative power among state bureaucratic agencies with the ability to mobilize institutional reform, which then serves to restrict environmental advancement.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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