Landscapes of (In)justice: Reflecting on Voices, Spaces, and Alliances for Just Transition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Just transitions seek to ameliorate the social and economic impacts of the global energy transitions that are essential to building an equitable low-carbon economy in the coming decades. Diverse groups of citizens need to be engaged in the design and implementation of transition policies across all scales and sectors for them to succeed and be socially acceptable. But how? And what lessons can we take from emerging practice to guide future action? This paper identifies insights from these experiences and struggles as they might pertain to contemporary attempts to ensure transitions are more socially just by drawing on a broad body of work on: (i) just transitions, energy justice, and energy transitions; (ii) contentious resource politics and attempts to democratise them; and (iii) social movement struggles for justice in the settings on which our project focuses. We focus on issues of voice (representation), spaces (for participation), and alliances (for change), paying particular attention to the three countries at the centre of this work: Colombia, Mozambique, and Nigeria.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".