MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3195746904 · doi:10.1080/13549839.2021.1969352

The rise of blockadia as a global anti-extractivism movement

2021· article· en· W3195746904 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueLocal Environment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicClimate Change and Geoengineering
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsGrassrootsEnvironmentalismDeliberationSocial movementPolitical economyState (computer science)Political scienceEconomic JusticeEnvironmental justiceClimate changeEnvironmental movementDemocracySociologyLawPoliticsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This viewpoint paper discusses the rise of blockadia as a global anti-extractivism movement over recent decades. It elucidates blockadia’s distinct characters and implications for future grassroots environmentalism. Collective actions constituting the blockadia movement differ from conventional environmental campaigns in terms of its (1) embrace of confrontational tactics, (2) integration of environmental and social justice concerns, and (3) reliance of grassroots coalitions whose members often have diversified backgrounds. By elaborating these characters, I argue that the rise of blockadia reveals diminishing public trust in capitalism’s capacity to avert the worst consequences of climate change. Blockadia thus presents a helpful concept to understand why climate justice activism increasingly bypasses traditional public deliberation mechanisms to intervene in energy policymaking at both state and regional levels.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.480
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

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)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.197 · 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