MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297913685

Les paysages d'Eole à l'épreuve du développement durable : Où accepter n'est pas toujours participer : chapitre 15

2013· preprint· en· W4297913685 on OpenAlexaffabout
Sophie Le Floch, Marie‐Josée Fortin

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2013
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurbineSustainable developmentTest (biology)Environmental scienceEngineeringAerospace engineeringPolitical scienceGeologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Generating green energy, wind turbines may appear as an incarnation of sustainable development. Meanwhile, they are contested in many countries, one central argument being that of the landscape. Social contestations give rise to numerous participative processes. On the basis of empirical studies carried on in France (Finistère) and in Quebec (Gaspésie), we show that the idea of participation, the processes and well as the places related to it, respond to a managerial approach and not to a democratic approach. This approach is obvious in the three dominant modes of participation analysed: communication/information, concertation and negociation. The political dimension of the landscape, as it is defined in the discourses and practices towards wind energy production, would be reinforced as it joins the participation issue, the latest being brought by the sustainable development concept. But this political dimension, potentially conflicting, is not fully expressed ; it is repressed by the objective of social acceptability, that has a capacity to divert from democratic aims. / Génératrice d'énergie « propre », l'éolienne peut apparaître comme une incarnation du développement durable. Pourtant, sa présence est discutée dans de nombreux pays, notamment en termes d'atteintes aux paysages. La montée des contestations sociales impulse de nombreux processus de participation. Sur la base de travaux empiriques conduits en France (Finistère) et au Québec (Gaspésie), nous montrons que la conception de la participation, les dispositifs et les lieux censés s'y rapporter, répondent principalement à une logique de type managérial et non à une logique démocratique. Cette logique est visible dans les trois modes de participation dominants analysés : communication/information, concertation et négociation. Le paysage, tel qu'il se redéfinit dans les discours et les pratiques relatifs au développement de la production énergétique éolienne, verrait donc a priori sa dimension politique affirmée du fait de sa rencontre avec la question de la participation, elle-même portée par certaines approches de développement durable. Mais cette dimension politique, potentiellement conflictuelle, n'est pas pleinement osée ; elle est réprimée par l'objectif de « l'acceptabilité sociale », qui a une certaine capacité à détourner d'objectifs démocratiques.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.064

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)Same topicSocial Acceptance of Renewable EnergyFrench-language works237,207