Les services écosystémiques en ville, ou l’opportunité d’une réconciliation entre les humains et la nature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose de comprendre comment la notion de services écosystémiques fonctionne de manière affective en milieu urbain. Les affects apparaissent ciblés et façonnés par un pouvoir qui cherche à rendre la présence de la nature en ville attractive et désirable. Ils contribuent à produire une nature et des sujets singuliers. À partir d’une étude de cas portant sur la Mission Économie de la Biodiversité et sur deux entreprises bailleuses de foncier, l’article montre que l’action du dispositif des services écosystémiques s’accompagne d’une réconciliation entre l’humain et la nature, d’une promesse de bien-être et d’un sens de l’opportunisme. This article aims to find out how the notion of ecosystem services operates affectively in an urban context. Affects appear to be targeted and shaped by powers that seek to render the presence of nature attractive and desirable in cities. They produce a singular nature and specific subjects. Drawing on a case study of an organization bringing together economy and biodiversity and two lessor companies, the article highlights that the actions of the device of ecosystem services are accompanied by a reconciliation between humans and nature, a promise of well-being and a sense of opportunism.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 teacher head, 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".