Construction d'un partenariat de connaissances sur les questions de justice environnementale : Exemple du projet européen EJOLT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article traite du futur de la recherche associative comme la construction d’un partenariat de connaissances appliqué, dans le cas présent, au domaine de la justice environnementale. Le développement d'un nouveau web, un web « herméneutique », permet d'envisager de quelle manière il est possible de développer des interfaces science-société reposant sur un modèle politique de dialogue autour de la connaissance. Le portail de connaissances ePLANETe sur l'éducation environnementale, l'économie écologique et le développement soutenable envisage une telle évolution. Trois outils sont présentés dans cet article, afin de mobiliser les acteurs et leurs connaissances pour construire une représentation collective des conflits socio-environnementaux et pour délibérer autour des choix sociaux à effectuer pour aller vers des modes de gouvernance environnementaux plus justes.The purpose of this article is to address the future of associative research aiming at building a partnership of knowledge, related in this article to environmental justice issues. The development of a new web, a "hermeneutic" web, makes us consider how possible it is to develop a science-society interface based on a political model of dialogue on knowledge. The ePLANETe knowledge portal on environmental education, ecological economics and sustainability anticipates such developments. Three tools are presented in this article, in order to mobilize actors and knowledge to build a collective representation of socio-environmental conflicts, to deliberate around social choice, and to make more accurate environmental governance.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".