From personal responsibility to an eco-socialist state: Political economy, popular discourses and the climate crisis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The adverse effects of climate change are already apparent with action required to forestall a full blown climate catastrophe. Despite findings that social democratic welfare states – Denmark, Finland, Norway and Sweden – more proactively respond to climate change through environmental policies that complement public policies promoting economic and social security, even these eco-social welfare state environmental policies are unlikely to avert a climate catastrophe. To avert a catastrophe will require gaining public control over energy policy and countering the power and influence of fossil-extracting industries. In theory, this could be accomplished through existing policy instruments. In reality, it may require establishment of a post-capitalist eco-socialist state, the outlines of which remain uncertain even among leading eco-socialist scholars. To effect either of these paths will require public awareness and support for such action. To that end, we identify public discourses of climate change which reflect these two ways forward as well as four other means of responding to climate change: (1) individual responsibility; (2) local action; (3) technocratic solution; (4) public policy advocacy; (5) balancing power in society; and (6) establishing a post-capitalist society. Despite the latter two discourses being the most likely to support effective action, they are the most marginalized.
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 | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.089 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".