Learning, Labour, and Environmentalism: Canadian and International Prospects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper I argue that for those interested in green, sustainable development, attention needs to be paid to the workplace. It is here where issues of work and intervention by organized labour have an important, under-recognized role to play. Reviewing both Canadian and international governmental reports, union policy, adult education, and social movement–oriented research literature on environmental innovation and conflict, I claim that continued greening of the labour movement represents one of the key challenges of our time, and a key opportunity. Support for union-based educational programming and attention to (labour and environmentalist) activist informal learning are necessary to sustain this claim. The analysis suggests that environmental issues represent a powerful opportunity structure for organized labour that may support the achievement of new organizing momentum and social legitimacy—points that are not lost on the different local and parent unions nor federations, as evidenced by their attempts to reframe the role of organized labour in production vis-à-vis forms of green sustainable production. However, it is also noted that attempts at innovation face barriers in terms of the structure of national labour relations regimes and the dynamics of adult learning within inter-movement conflict. Résumé Dans ce papier je me dispute que pour ces intéressé dans vert, le développement durable, les besoins d’attention être payé au lieu de travail. C’est ici où les problèmes de travail et l’intervention par le travail organisé ont un rôle important et sous-reconnu pour jouer. Réexaminer Canadien et les rapports gouvernementaux internationaux, la politique d’union, l’enseignement pour adultes, et le mouvement social–a orienté la littérature de recherche sur l’innovation et le conflit écologique, je réclame que la prise de conscience écologique continué du mouvement travailliste représente un des défis clés de notre temps, et une occasion clé. Le soutien pour union-basé la programme nationale et l’attention éducatives à (le travail et l’écologiste) l’activiste érudition simple est nécessaire
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 | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".