Résister aux projets d’aménagement, politiser les territoires
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nous souhaitons ici formuler l’hypothèse selon laquelle les résistances aux projets d’aménagement peuvent être l’occasion d’une (re)politisation des territoires. En décortiquant trois cas de luttes territoriales contre des infrastructures (une décharge, une autoroute et une prison), nous étudions l’évolution des mouvements de contestation dans le temps au travers du concept de résistance éclairée. Ce concept nous permet de voir émerger sur les territoires concernés la constitution de réseaux sociaux, de savoirs spécifiques et d’attachements aux lieux. Nous soutenons que le développement et l’articulation de ces trois « capitaux » (social, patrimonial, savant) permettent l’émergence d’un positionnement politique. Encore souvent qualifiés de NIMBY, ces différents collectifs, par leur politisation, créent au contraire un mouvement social décentralisé et multi-situé porteur de valeurs nouvelles.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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; 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".