La Bretagne face aux industries extractives. Processus de cadrage et construction de coalitions contre la prospection minière et l’extraction de sable dans les Côtes d’Armor
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans les Côtes d’Armor, en Bretagne, deux projets d’extraction de ressources naturelles font face à de fortes contestations locales à partir de 2016. Il s’agit d’une part du permis exclusif de recherche minière (PERM) de Loc-Envel, dans les terres, et d’autre part de la concession de sable coquillier de la Pointe d’Armor, sur la côte. Bien que géographiquement proches, ces deux mobilisations se structurent différemment : alors que la mobilisation contre le PERM de Loc-Envel prend la forme d’une coalition souple, celle contre l’extraction de sable se structure en organisation de coalition (Staggenborg, 1986). Comment expliquer ces divergences, sur un territoire réduit, dans la structuration de ces mobilisations ? Pour répondre à cette question, nous interrogerons le poids des héritages locaux, mais également des processus de cadrage dans la structuration des mobilisations environnementales. Une problématisation qui, si elle prend un tour plutôt contre-expert sur la côte et plus territorialisé dans les terres, ne s’inscrit ici que marginalement dans une critique de l’extractivisme (Bednik, 2016).
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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".