Introduction: Conceptualizing Environment-Society Relations
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
This introductory chapter presents the purpose of the book: to scrutinize existing core conceptualizations of environment-society relations, because such a critical gaze will allow for deeper reflection, help to confront denialism, engage sociological imagination, and lead to more fruitful communication and action within the environmental sciences and transdisciplinary. The chapter discusses the role of concepts and the opportunities and challenges related to when science, policy and practice share the same concepts. The chapter introduces three overall questions for the book concerning the explanatory power; social, cultural, or geo-political ‘biases’ and ‘blinders’; and the action-potential implicated by the concepts. It introduces a set of conceptual traps that scholars ought to avoid when theorizing on environment-society relations. Finally it introduces the concepts scrutinized in the book.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.054 | 0.003 |
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