MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206756704 · doi:10.1093/cdj/bsi059

Growth Fetish

2005· article· en· W4206756704 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Loney

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunity Development Journal · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsStatistics Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Clive Hamilton, Pluto Press, London, 262 pp., ISBN 0 7453 2251 4 (hb), 0 7543 2250 6 (pb) Hamilton has an ambitious agenda: not simply a critique of the environmental and other dangers that come with the myopic pursuit of growth above all else but a new agenda to mobilize what he sees as a politically moribund left. Hamilton takes effective aim at the vacuities of the Third Way and its intellectual poster boys, most notably the London School of Economics' Anthony Giddens. He rightly dismisses the claim that the solution to deprivation in the West is simply more economic growth. Hamilton claims that most people ‘are prosperous beyond the dreams of their parents and grandparents’; this is no doubt true for many, although for single income families the generational shift has been less benign. Hamilton offers a trenchant critique of the Third Way's slippery handling of the issue of social inequality, where the earlier ideal of greater equality of condition gave way to the illusive quest for equality of opportunity. This is surely the greatest intellectual sleight, for how can a society generating ever more unequal life circumstances conjure up the social programmes that will neutralize the ability of one generation to communicate its privileges to its progeny? In reality politicians and their public servants spend extraordinary amounts of money to redistribute life chances in the lower social strata with little effect on the silver-spooned trajectory of their social betters. Unfortunately Hamilton offers no clear platform for achieving greater economic equality, the key challenge to any writer seeking to reinvigorate the left.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.111
Threshold uncertainty score0.370

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1110.042

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCommunity Development JournalFrench-language works237,207