MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3130615972 · doi:10.1139/facets-2020-0072

The tragedy of conservation

2021· article· en· W3130615972 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Raymond A. Rogers

Bibliographic record

VenueFACETS · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTragedy of the commonsTragedy (event)CapitalismMetaphorArgument (complex analysis)Environmental ethicsPolitical sciencePositive economicsCommonsSociologyLaw and economicsNeoclassical economicsEconomic systemEconomicsSocial scienceLawPoliticsPhilosophyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A central contention of this paper is that conservation strategies are failing because they have become increasingly integrated into, and share the assumptions of, the structures of capitalism. As a result, conservation is becoming a strategic specialty within capitalism, rather than an ethical challenge to its basic assumptions. The paper examines this integration by analysing the way Hardin’s argument in the “tragedy of the commons” metaphor was taken up by policy makers in Canada’s East Coast fishery and a case is made that, as seen in the case of the fishery, this strategic integration limited the analytical capability of conservation to highlight the causes of environmental degradation. The critical literature on Hardin’s model points to the failure to recognize the importance of social relations and local institutional arrangements in combatting environmental failure. This paper contributes to the importance of “the social” in conservation debates by emphasizing Polanyi’s contrasting definitions of formal and substantive economics and the way they relate to contrasting conceptions of tragedy, as set out by Hardin (formal tragedy from above) and Goldmann’s conception of a historically specific tragedy that can be described as substantive tragedy from below. The analytical failure associated with Hardin’s metaphor can serve as a cautionary tale for current strategic and specific conservation strategies that tend to downplay the importance of ethical and social issues.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.250
Threshold uncertainty score0.724

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.184
Teacher spread0.176 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFACETSSame topicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207