MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411715275 · doi:10.1007/s13593-025-01017-2

Assessment of permaculture integration into gray and mainstream scientific literature in four languages. A review

2025· review· en· W4411715275 on OpenAlexaff
Roberto Carlos Forte Taylor, O. Grant Clark, Julien Jean Malard-Adam

Bibliographic record

VenueAgronomy for Sustainable Development · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEnvironmental, Ecological, and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamGray (unit)Sustainable developmentAgricultureEnvironmental ethicsSociologyGeographyPolitical scienceArchaeologyPhilosophyMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Permaculture, often described as a grassroots movement, philosophy, or set of progressive agricultural practices, is considered to have significant potential to revitalize degraded land, improve the robustness of ecosystems, reduce energy consumption, and lower operating costs while effectively sequestering carbon. Despite its growing international popularity and practical benefits, the term permaculture remains notably isolated from mainstream scientific discourse, limiting its broader integration and impact. Literature reviews on this versatile set of agricultural practices are uncommon, and this isolation from established scientific literature significantly hampers the potential of permaculture to influence and transform contemporary agricultural systems toward enhanced sustainability. Addressing this gap, this study compiles the most comprehensive collection of white and gray literature related to permaculture to date, analyzing 975 publications across four languages—English, Portuguese, Spanish, and French—through bibliometric analysis, qualitative content analysis, H-index, and citation counts. The findings reveal that permaculture retains a dynamic presence within academic discussions, being increasingly associated with critical concepts such as design, agriculture, and ecology. Notably, the use of permaculture in peer-reviewed technical publications has surged, particularly in recent study periods, marking a significant shift towards recognizing its value in mainstream scientific literature. This review aims to: Gather white and gray literature related to the term permaculture across four languages. Identify terms most commonly associated with permaculture using computational tools. Describe the evolution of the term permaculture over time. Examine whether the term permaculture is predominantly associated with philosophical or scientific perspectives in peer-reviewed literature. Assess the increasing recognition of permaculture as a topic of interest in English peer-reviewed literature.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.035
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.910
Threshold uncertainty score0.059

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.035
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.002
Bibliometrics0.0900.070
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAgronomy for Sustainable DevelopmentSame topicEnvironmental, Ecological, and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207