Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the decided interest in the future of coastal communities and their oncoming transitions, the coasts present a rich context to understand and deconstruct the processes of displacement—enclosure, ocean grabbing, gentrification, financialization—and the potency of adjacency claims. Gentrification scholarship, although expanding from its urban centrism to iterations in rural places, has not paid sufficient attention to coastal areas as a unique subset of the rural and urban. Gentrification’s and ocean grabbing’s connections to financialization are also explored. Our aim is to: (1) identify parallels and gaps specific to coastal communities in ocean grabbing, gentrification, and financialization literatures and (2) formulate a research agenda combining these literatures and applying them to coastal communities to study transition and constructions of adjacency as resistance. While scholars have theorized that the coast’s spatial specificity may enable communities to raise adjacency claims, scholarship has not reconciled the degree to which coastal communities should benefit from marine resources and ocean spaces. We argue that adjacency claims manifest in the resistance toward (a) ocean grabbing, (b) gentrification, and (c) financialization, and come in both literal and figurative formulations. Investigating adjacency claims as forms of resistance to these three phenomena will unite often disconnected research domains and give further insight into constructions of peripherality and forms and effects of displacement.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".