Towards a reframing of Eryri: how historic framings of landscape influence perceptions and expectations of a Welsh national park
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The landscape decision-making system in northwest Wales is insufficiently democratised and the main framings of Eryri (Snowdonia) are grounded in the perception and expectation that it is a sublime, distant and static landscape. Eryri, however, is changing. The landscape of the national park is already being impacted by climate change and the loss of biodiversity. Anticipated future change will also bring the need for further adaptation and transformation in land management. Historic framings of Eryri perpetuate ideologies and ambivalences that have, and could, continue to hamper the much-needed landscape change required to tackle today’s multiple crises. This article explores how past modes of representation, newly specialised industries and government legislation have perpetuated a limited understanding of Eryri. It links the eighteenth-century ‘top-down’, elitist rationalisation of the environment and the legacies of longing to find a ‘truly British’ landscape, with people’s current perceptions and expectations of the landscape. This article begins the journey of exposing the dominant ideologies of landscape, helping to define the underlying problem with the current prevailing framings of the landscape of the national park. It concludes by going beyond defining the problem and proposes an approach to actively reframe Eryri. To do this, it acknowledges the need to empower multiple voices, involving diverse forms of knowledge and incorporating new ways of representation within the landscape decision-making process.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it