Planting flowers for the bees: Spirituality, emotion, and embodied subjectivities through relational practices of socioecological care
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research highlights the ways by which processes of caring for our environments can contribute to health and well-being for the minded body. Drawing upon rich ethnographic accounts of urban cultivation practices and experiences, this research unfolds in the birthplace of the 'Healthy City' concept-Kuching, Malaysia-which is an ethnically diverse city home to Chinese, Malay, Indigenous and other groups. Building from situated political ecologies-and more specifically, emotional political ecology and the political ecology of religion-I examine the relational values produced through practices of urban cultivation and related benefits for mind-body-environments. I find spirituality, religion, gender, generation, class, and ethnicity are embodied in socionatural relationships facilitated through urban agriculture. Through affective encounters with non-human animals, spiritual meanings inferred from the materiality of plants, and strengthened socionatural relationships with friends, family, even strangers, and the divine, practices of urban cultivation can nurture minds, bodies, and environments in deeply interconnected ways. This adds to a growing literature that reveals the importance of relational values for well-being and argues that socionatural relationships of care can contribute to a meaningful life. With a careful attention to relational dynamics and differentiated embodied experiences, I show that cultivators engage in the production of ecologies of care that confront neoliberal modes of interacting with themselves and others. Recognizing that care is embodied, situated and political can foster more nuanced understandings of the politics of socioecological transformation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".