A selective review of environmental perceptions, attitudes, place attachment, and their spatial characterisation: contrasting the South African and global perspectives
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This selective review points to a rich body of literature on environmental perceptions, attitudes, and place attachment in South Africa. Research works highlight that the global-North dominates in human–nature relations studies, with relatively less work done in less developed economies such as sub-Saharan Africa and South Africa. Additionally, the review of the literature on these concepts points to the complexity of these aspects in terms of their conceptual distinctions, amorphous nature, and hence the difficulties surrounding their spatial characterisation. This selective review aims to provide a contrast between South African and international studies on these concepts. This review notes that human–nature studies in South Africa are dominated by place research, which is largely influenced by the country's spatio-political setting, where social engineering was influenced by past policies that had substantial impacts on the arrangement of space, identity, and belonging. Additionally, the review notes the dearth of literature that has attempted to spatially characterise human–nature relations in the country. Spatially characterising these concepts could be beneficial for urban and environmental planners and policymakers in the country, and assist in initiatives meant to reduce spatial inequalities in the country.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".