The production of climate security futures in the West African Sahel
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Much has been written and said about the consequences of climate change on security in the West African Sahel. Sceptics argue that claims about the links between global warming and conflict dynamics rest on limited evidence and questionable assumptions. Others work on the institutionalization and operationalization of climate security. This implementation seems inevitable, if slow, difficult, and at times vague, as there is simply no consensus on what climate security implies in practice and what it is meant to achieve. What is climate security, and whose climate security are we talking about? This article analyses climate security as a structure of knowledge and a set of epistemic relationships that inform practices and relationships. It draws on participant observations of a Dakar-based research group that travelled to Bamako, Ouagadougou, and Niamey. At the intersection of research, policy, and programme implementation, this case study provides a unique look into the emergence of climate security relations and practices. The findings point to the rising structural force of climate security and how it can overcome both research uncertainties and sensitive diplomatic relations. The article shows that there is more to climate security than the focus on the conflict-climate nexus lets on.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".