Recasting the Treadmills of Production and Destruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We revisit and recast two prominent theories of environmental degradation: the treadmill of production and the treadmill of destruction. This recasting is guided by critical realism, focused on theorizing generative mechanisms that produce and shape empirical events. Our theorization is informed by Marxist and Weberian insights into environmental sociology contributions. In this critical realist recasting, the treadmill of production and the treadmill of destruction are conceived of as generative mechanisms. A treadmill refers to a process in which powerful organizations appropriate nature to amass power and capital. These organizations degrade the environment, and they suppress and distort information about the environmental damage they cause. The macrosocial context, the organizations at the center of them, and the elites that command these organizations make these treadmills distinct. A treadmill spans the biophysical and the social/cultural realms. Whereas the biophysical is necessary for the social/cultural realm to exist, it exists independent of human knowledge of this realm. As such, historical contingency and social change are at the center of analysis when studying the waxing, waning, transformation, and demise of treadmills. Adopting a critical realist stance, future theorization and research can and should engage a wide range of theories advanced in environmental sociology. The goal is not to establish the single best unitary theory, but to identify and gain insight into the generative mechanisms that shape and constrain human interactions with the environment.
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.060 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.022 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".