Climate–water crises: critically engaging relational, spatial, and temporal dimensions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Declarations of water crises have been ubiquitous in water policy and practice for decades. In the face of unprecedented human-caused climate change, the circulation of water crisis discourses has increased in frequency. How crises are defined and made meaningful, however, is often assumed to be commonly agreed upon. Reviewing scholarship at the intersections of water and climate, we show that crisis discourses are inherently political because they depend both on the authority and legitimacy to delineate exceptions from norms, and on the powers to mobilize resources to respond to constructions of crisis. Engaging with crisis as an explicitly normative concept helps situate analyses within the social, historical, political, and geographic particularities of water–climate systems. We identify three interrelated analytical frames that assist with this task: relationality, spatiality, and temporality. Our review hopes to better position researchers, policy makers, and activists to critically engage with crisis narratives. Doing so can effectively advance more critical, creative, and imaginative crisis responses.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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 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".