Bordering sustainability in the Anthropocene
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
While environmental matters rarely respect political boundaries, efforts to govern resource, pollution, wildlife and numerous other matters are often profoundly shaped by territorial jurisdiction. Direct regulation, trade restrictions and forms of international cooperation have all shaped global efforts at environmental governance, while fortress conservation ideas frequently invoke territorial exclusivity. The context for these measures has been changing both as a consequence of the growth of the global economy and as a result of the biophysical transformations that are integral to this expansion through the period of the great acceleration. Climate adaptation practices frequently invoked practices of enclosure and expulsion that are often counter-productive. Novel circumstances due to accelerating Anthropocene change now shape the policy landscape, while numerous policy-makers grapple with how to implement the Sustainable Development Goals. These require rethinking the bordering practices that govern environmental matters and the relationships of territory to ecological function. This is necessary now not least because of increased natural system instability, the new condition of non-stationarity and the inadequacy of stable base line assumptions for dealing with rapid change across boundaries.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it