Bibliographic record
Abstract
Citizens' movements in Korea have taken root largely in the late 1980s and the early 90s, during which time Korea became a liberal and democratic state having toppled the military regime that ruled the country for a quarter of a century. In the process, citizens' movements began to advocate diverse causes and suddenly became a formidable social force. It is natural that much attention has been paid to the citizens' movements, their activities and organizations. Yet, the organizations' paid staff has received virtually no attention. This paper, part of a two-year study designed to investigate the habits and behavioral patterns of Korean people, examines the full-time staff working for citizens' movements and explores some of the common features of their everyday life, with particular attention paid to their values and attitudes. To that end, the author devised semi-structured questions to encourage them to respond in their own words about their work, lives, experiences and hopes. Twenty of the fifty or so of the staff of Green Korea Ullited(GKU) were interviewed in depth. This article reviews their reflections on, and aspirations about themselves and their movement. This study first looks at their backgrounds and their experiences before they joined GKU. Then, it considers their efforts to realize ecological alternatives to the received processes of pursuing material gain. Finally, it deals with the way by which they form and maintain collective self-identity. They work as realistic citizens in the sense that they believe their fight is worth fighting, even though it may be difficult. The article concludes by paying heed to the tension between their aspirations for post-material alternatives and their own organization's need for material resources from the outside. The staff may have to seek to find personal reward from within the bounds of the movement's organization, much like finding a green spot in smoggy urban areas.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.013 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".