Can the planet be saved in <i>Time</i> ? On the temporalities of socionature, the clock and the limits debate
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The tendency of capitalist modernity to impose predictable, homogenous and linear representations of time for economic productivity has made it increasingly difficult, if not impossible, to effectively respond to catastrophic environmental changes that are emergent, sudden, non-linear and unpredictable. A confusion between the actions and consequences of environmental change, and socialized representations of time and space within which humans must respond to such changes, not only paralyses possible solutions within fixed imaginaries but is also out of synch with the perpetual coming-into-being of socionature entanglements. The multiple temporalities coordinating interactions of humans and non-human natures are instead fetishized and made governable, commensurable and reproducible through the mechanistic intervals of the clock. We argue that the desire for transformative system change can be found in temporal desynchronizations to clock Time (capital T) and that political strategies to responding to socio-ecological crises reside in alter-temporalities (lower t time) of emergent socionature relations. Through an example of the desynchronized temporalities of tinawon rice production, we show how alter-temporalities emerge to reclaim cultural and food sovereignty from the otherwise flattening effects of modernity. We highlight the futuring potentials of such temporalities and their implication within ongoing debates between ecomodernists and those advocating limits to growth. Given that continuing to act in the Time of capital evidently fails to bring about system change and even aids in perpetuating our crises, we claim that responding in time (lower t) is itself a political act in raising the possibility for more convivial and life-affirming futures.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".