Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his essay entitled, Energy and Equity , medieval historian and social critic Ivan Illich observed that the first step toward addressing the energy crisis is to recognize that there are thresholds which technical processes begin to dictate social relations. Calories are both biologically and socially healthy only as long as they stay within the narrow range that separates from too much. 1 In order to uncover what enough might mean in the post-collapse cod fisheries of Newfoundland and Labrador, and the many other collapsed fisheries around the world, we focus on debates, since the 1850’s, on the appropriateness of various fishing methods. We argue that the introduction of the cod jigger in the 19 th century marks a transgression of natural thresholds beyond which technical imperatives began to dictate social relations, both among people and between codfish and people. In the case of energy use, Illich shows that “the threshold of social disintegration by high energy quanta is independent from the threshold at which energy conservation produces physical destruction.” 2 He argues that cultural and social thresholds are more sensitive than bio-physical ones, occurring much earlier and at lower levels of energy exploitation. More generally, his argument implies that the atrophy of the social imaginary by the industrial mind-set occurs far earlier than the damages to the physical environment due to runaway industrialization. This paper explores the extent to which the cod fisheries of Newfoundland and Labrador exemplify Illich’s observations on the timing and relationships among cultural, social and biophysical thresholds. We conclude by arguing that contemporary policy and management discussions on world fisheries are ineffectual and irrelevant because they are blind to the existence of natural thresholds associated with fish and fishing.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".