MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3162498912 · doi:10.4000/ere.6526

De l’environnement comme problème politique à l’environnement-label - Le cas d’une démarche Agenda 21 local

2021· article· fr· W3162498912 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jérôme Lafitte

Bibliographic record

VenueÉducation relative à l environnement · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article identifie et caractérise une nouvelle représentation sociale de l’environnement, celle de l’environnement-label qui vient s’ajouter à la typologie des sept représentations sociales qui résulte de la recherche en éducation relative à l’environnement menée par Sauvé et Garnier en 2000. Une telle représentation a émergé d’analyses produites dans le cadre de notre recherche doctorale. Cette recherche avait pour but d’étudier la dynamique dialogique du savoir environnemental, soit principalement, la construction et les échanges de savoirs intervenant à l’occasion d’une démarche participative Agenda 21 local, démarche qui applique et promeut les principes du cadre référentiel du développement durable. Cet article contextualise l’analyse qui permet le repérage de cette représentation sociale de l’environnement, ancrée dans la communication, soit la communication territoriale pour le cas présent. La représentation sociale de l’environnement-label semble répondre à une préoccupation de plus en plus affirmée d’un environnement envisagé comme objet de communication. Dans cette perspective, il semble opportun de porter attention aux enjeux éducationnels associés, notamment dans une perspective analytique et critique.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.034
Scholarly communication0.0160.016
Open science0.0020.009
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.113
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉducation relative à l environnementSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207