Sustainability powered by digitalization? (Re-)politicizing the debate
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
As ecological crises escalate, various stakeholders frame digitalization as a key solution for sustainability transformations. Besides incremental optimization, this promise has not materialized yet. We argue that digital solutions toward sustainability objectives are shaped by and reinforce power structures that effectively undermine sustainability outcomes. Academic discourse and governance are often dominated by a technology-centric framing in contrast to technologically informed, power-centric approaches. In this article, we develop an interdisciplinary framework to analyze three interconnected dimensions of power at the sustainability-digitalization-nexus and reveal how they obstruct sustainability. We locate power at the levels of environmental knowledge, governance, and technological materiality. First, digital technologies create representations of the environment that reinforce, reconfigure, or clash with preexisting ones, striving for more and better digital real-time data for technological control. Second, the spread of digital technologies is facilitated by emerging actor coalitions that promote digitalization while employing a reductionist understanding of sustainability. This narrows the policy space to optimization and incremental solutionism, which reproduces the status quo. Finally, the designs and material infrastructures of current digital technologies create path dependencies and lock-in effects while the underlying colonial resource and wealth flows remain hidden. We advocate for a (re-)politicization of digitalization across these dimensions to leverage its potential for sustainability transformations. We conclude that digitalization cannot spare us from political conflicts and deliberation processes about desirable sustainability futures. The debate should re-center fundamental questions about what kind of sustainable futures we want, where technology has a role to play, and where it does not.
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 | 0.001 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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