Co-envisioning the social-ecological transition through youth eco-activists’ narratives: toward a relational approach to ecological justice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on qualitative data collected during the first phase of an intervention-research, this study explores the concept of “social-ecological transition” (SET) from the perspectives of youth eco-activists. As a multi-level approach to intersecting social and ecological crisis, this notion has yet been examined from a social work viewpoint and limited knowledge is available regarding how it is being appropriated and envisioned in nonscientific spaces. Considering the need to increase youth participation in ecosocial work and climate governance, youth eco-activists from Canada (N = 10) were interviewed to explore their definitions of the SET and to better understand youth-specific issues related to climate change and climate action. A focus group was conducted with five of those same youth and aimed to foreground their experiential knowledge to collaboratively refine the ecosocial component of a sport and nature-based program, implemented at a subsequent phase of the research. Findings show that youth focus especially on socio-cultural elements of the transition, therefore expanding current understandings of the SET. Three main components are mapped-out (Intersectional climate justice, Intergenerational allyship, Place-based connections) and reveal that collaborations, solidarities, and connections are at the heart of eco-activists’ narratives. Key considerations for ecosocial work practice are discussed by centering youth voices, thus showcasing the need for increased experiential learnings to (re)connect with nature and community. The concept of relational ecological justice is proposed to capture a nuanced, non-dichotomic position concerning the ecocentrism/anthropocentrism debate, an approach that invites to renegotiate the ontological boundaries of ecosocial work.
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 | 0.021 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".