Agencies of intimacy: fleshing out vegetal politics by exploring plant agency in gardens and produce supply chains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article investigates plant agency and human-plant relations in two disparate sites: city vegetable gardens and pandemic produce supply chains. Drawing on posthumanist theory and data generated during two qualitative research projects in food systems, this paper explores the characteristics of plant agency to flesh out an understanding of ‘vegetal politics,’ the complicated and intimate world-making relationships between people and plants. The argument is that the relational agency of plants produced through human-plant intimacies emerges in part from the plants’ capacity to turn sun into food for humans through photosynthesis. Comparing the relational agency of plants in these two different sites reveals plant agency to be mutable, shaped by the processes and conditions of the interspecies’ relationships including mobility and immobility. Further, these agencies emerge from the plant collective. This article underlines how all plants cannot be flattened into one category of ‘plant’. Plant agency matters because plants in agri-food systems have long been bound up in the workings of power. Understanding what plants do can deepen an understanding of the current context, including justice and injustice..
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".