Rethinking power, production, and social reproduction: Toward variegated social reproduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue introduces new work, new perspectives, and engages in a dialogue to revisit, extend and go beyond the original central hypothesis of Power, Production and Social Reproduction (2003). That volume and its primary hypothesis focused upon the unfolding contradiction between the global accumulation of capital and the provision of stable and progressive conditions of social reproduction. It hypothesized a growing contradiction between the intensified power of capital and many life-making/sustaining processes, including the condition of bodies and the biosphere. Our original hypothesis conceptualized capital accumulation and social reproduction as interlinked although within different and contradictory moments in the same system or totality. We add to this here the concept of variegated social reproduction which refers to the historical and ontological variability of social reproduction - and its specific differentiations and varieties in contemporary globalized capitalism - stemming from concrete social, cultural, ecological and material practices and structures. Indeed, as the articles in the special issue reflect, the neoliberalization and commodification of social reproduction remains incomplete and not all-encompassing or determinant. As such, the introduction and the special issue also suggest new research agendas.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".