MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4389241772 · doi:10.1177/08854122231217703

The “Dark Side” of Climate Action Planning

2023· article· en· W4389241772 on OpenAlexaff
Kayleigh Swanson

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Planning Literature · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change, Adaptation, Migration
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGreat RiftContext (archaeology)Climate changeUnintended consequencesEnvironmental planningAction (physics)GentrificationClimate change adaptationUrban planningAdaptation (eye)Natural resource economicsEnvironmental resource managementBusinessPolitical scienceGeographyEconomicsEngineeringEcologyEconomic growthPsychologyCivil engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We are increasingly seeing the unintended social consequences of climate action planning as urban efforts to be climate-responsive create uneven exposure to climate risks and contribute to new forms of gentrification and displacement. I use Yiftachel’s four dimensions of planning control as a framework to explore the circumstances in which planning emerges as an oppressive activity in the context of climate change. I argue that seemingly progressive mitigation and adaptation actions are accompanied by a “dark side” that can advance regressive outcomes despite the positive intentions of planners.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.587
Threshold uncertainty score0.490

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.122
GPT teacher head0.385
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Planning LiteratureSame topicClimate Change, Adaptation, MigrationFrench-language works237,207