Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gardening has long been conceptualized as a practice that blurs nature-human binaries and connects humans to nature in rapidly urbanising worlds. Based on six weeks of fieldwork on the Cape Flats, this article explores human interpretations of beyond-human connections and experiences that are engendered in their home vegetable gardens. It weaves together ethnographic data and theoretical frameworks like posthumanism, multispecies ethnography and actor-network theory to analyse the inner workings of these relationships. I collaborated with six interlocutors and their gardens to reveal how companionships with plants and their produce complicate, contest or conform to nature-human binaries. In doing so, this paper investigates how through gardening, interlocutors come to recognize otherwise ‘invisible’ elements in the natural world as valued companions that not only co-produce healthy vegetables, but also co-create identities, emotions, practices, and justices. However, this paper also traces the exchanges that take place within the garden, contending that only the gardening agents that are perceived capable of maintaining beneficial reciprocities come to be coded as companions, whilst others that do not become pests or nuisances. Through these insights, it aims to add nuances to the claims that gardening dissolves human-nature dichotomies.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".