Bibliographic record
Abstract
Environmental change of unprecedented scale, scope and pace challenge the capacity of social inquiry to understand these changes and to inform responses. Regional differentiation of physical and biological environments, along with persistent differentiation in the space economy suggest the need for a regional approach. Regional science is well suited in some ways, yet placement of the politics and economics of environmental change at the forefront, and analysis of the broader social context in which economic production is undertaken--both necessary--are not the hallmarks of regional science as it has developed to date. Thus, I argue in this paper for a political economy approach to regional science and the environment, characterised by a commitment to both historical and geographical contextualism. In particular, I develop three analytical themes: (i) the importance of politics in the study of human-environment relations; (ii) the relationship between material processes of social and environmental change on one hand, and the social construction of nature and environment on the other; and (iii) issues of method. At the end of the paper, I suggest one possible application of these ideas in examining contemporary reconfigurations of environmental and natural resource policies against the backdrop of regulatory restructuring more generally using Regulation Theory. Although I offer political economy as a theoretical starting point, my goal is not to dismiss competing approaches, nor to advocate theoretical rigidity. Rather, I see this as a fruitful strategy for regional scientists to draw on existing strengths in the regional science community, and at the same time to more productively tackle the pressing issues that contemporary environmental change and its politics present. Le changement environnemental d'une ampleur, d'une envergure et d'une taille sans precedents pose des defis a la capacite de la recherche en sciences sociales de les comprendre et de contribuer aux reponses. La differentiation des milieux physique et biophysique, de meme que la differentiation persistante de l'economie spatiale, souligne le besoin d'une approche regionale. Les sciences regionales sont de plusieurs points de vue bien placee pour le faire, mais mettre en avant les dimensions politique et economique du changement environnemental, et l'analyse du contexte general social dans lequel la production economique est poursuivi--toutes les deux necessaires--ne sont pas des caracteristiques marquantes des sciences regionales telles qu'elles ont evolue jusqu'a nos jours. Donc, je propose dans cet article une approche d'economie politique aux sciences regionales et l'environnement, caracterisee par un engagement a la fois aux contextes historique et geographique. En particulier, je developpe trois themes analytiques: (i) l'importance de la politique dans l'etude des relations societe-environnement ; (ii) le rapport entre d'une part les processus materiaux de changement social et environnemental, et d'autre part, la construction sociale de la nature et de l'environnement; et (iii) des questions de methodes. Pour terminer, je suggere une application possible de ces idees pour l'examen de la reconfiguration contemporaine des politiques environnementales et de la richesse naturelle dans le contexte de la restructuration de la regulation de facon plus generale en utilisant la theorie de la regulation. Bien que je propose l'economie politique comme un point de depart theorique, mon but n'est pas d'ecarter des approches alternatives, ni de proposer une rigidite theorique. Au contraire, je le vois comme une strategie productive pour que les specialistes en sciences regionales puissent se baser sur les forces existantes dans la communaute de sciences regionales, et en meme temps, aborder de facon plus efficace les enjeux urgents presentes par le changement environnement actuel et les politiques qui l'entourent. …
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 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".