China's Eco‐Civilisation, Climate Leviathan, and Hobbesian Energy Transition
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Scholars have hitherto tended to theorise China's ecological civilisation project either as a form of environmental authoritarianism or as a vision of eco‐socialism. This paper contributes to the conversation by conducting a textual analysis of Chinese scholarly discussions on eco‐civilisation. The analysis uncovers topics and themes related to both narratives of environmental authoritarianism and eco‐socialist envisioning. It also captures the shift in discussion from an ideological critique of industrial civilisation to a techno‐bureaucratic agenda concerning sustainable development and governance strategies, along with the growing roles of the party‐state, state‐corporate cooperation, and geopolitical ambition. To interpret the findings, I revisit the neo‐Weberian institutionalist notion of embedded autonomy and revise it through critical realist Marxism, not only to explain the growing bureaucratisation of eco‐civilisation but also to untangle its Hobbesian institutional features that distinguish China's eco‐civilisation project (or the making of a Climate Leviathan) from the Western liberal mode of environmental governance.
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 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 | 0.000 | 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 it