MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391291469 · doi:10.1080/13549839.2024.2306598

Community perceptions of sustainability: (Re)framing what matters for more just, ethical, and liveable municipalities

2024· article· en· W4391291469 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueLocal Environment · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPosthumanist Ethics and Activism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of SaskatchewanUniversity of ReginaUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)SustainabilityPerceptionSociologyPublic relationsPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsCommunity engagementPsychologyGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Municipal governments and community organisations are key stakeholders in the mobilisation of global Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) through opportunities to make and implement sustainability policies at local levels. However, as perceptions of sustainability are normalised through globalising, colonial, neoliberal, and capitalist discourses, alternative stories of sustainability become marginalised. In response, this article positions diverse, contrasting, and often conflicting perceptions of sustainability within a relational assemblage to map the affects of difference between normalising and alternative perceptions of sustainability in local governance contexts of Saskatchewan, Canada. This article adopts cartographic and diffractive storytelling to map diverse perceptions of sustainability gathered through a series of focus groups and a Skills Forum event, as part of the Governing Sustainable Municipalities (GSM) project. By reading perceptions of sustainability through each other, economic, social, and environmental pillars of sustainability and diverse perceptions of sustainability from diverse stakeholders come into an entangled/differentiated relationship. As there is no central point of reference in a relational assemblage, heterogeneous perceptions of sustainability are held together through complex patternings of diverse, multiple, and often sticky, uneven knottings that dislodge hierarchical assumptions about what counts as sustainability. Providing an emplaced and situated account of perceptions of sustainability, we illustrate how municipal and organisational actors can transform through co-implicated relationships with social and material forces. To this end, assemblage thinking provides important anticolonial possibilities for sustainability policy making and implementation in the municipal sector.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.821

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.304 · 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