MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405662119 · doi:10.1038/s44168-024-00204-3

Shifting and sharing power in urban climate justice work: experiments in transformative learning in Vancouver, Canada

2024· article· en· W4405662119 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Lindsay Cole, Laura Kozak

Bibliographic record

Venuenpj Climate Action · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Work Education and Practice
Canadian institutionsEmily Carr University of Art and DesignUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCity of VancouverReal Estate Foundation of British ColumbiaMitacs
KeywordsTransformative learningWork (physics)Economic JusticePower (physics)Climate justiceSociologyPower sharingEnvironmental justicePolitical scienceClimate changePedagogyEngineeringLawOceanographyGeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the global reckoning with a changing climate increases in urgency, and the real-world consequences of delayed and inadequate action become impossible to ignore, city leadership continues to grow in response. Cities are making significant shifts in policy and regulation, investing in infrastructure, building strong cross-sectoral collaborations, experimenting with solutions, advocating for changes outside their jurisdiction, and taking other important actions. Alongside these activities is a growing critique that climate action is not adequately integrating principles and goals of justice, equity, inclusion, or decoloniality. In this article we argue that transformative learning is an underutilized theory and practice when working toward city-based just climate action. We describe transformative learning approaches and implications in running a Climate Justice Field School in Vancouver, Canada, a response to implementing the first ever Climate Justice Charter for the city. This work resulted in five transformative learning interventions for urban climate researchers and practitioners to engage with as they move toward just, equitable, inclusive, decolonial climate action.

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 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 score0.619
Threshold uncertainty score0.838

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.332 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuenpj Climate ActionSame topicSocial Work Education and PracticeFrench-language works237,207