MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413286158 · doi:10.1080/21624887.2025.2545673

From resource security to resource securitisation: materialities, latent securitisation, and the politics of (in)security in low-carbon transitions

2025· article· en· W4413286158 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Studies on Security · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Security and Public Health
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsResource (disambiguation)Security studiesEnvironmental securityPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Building on recent debates about materialities, this paper examines processes of resource securitisation occurring amidst a climate crisis and renewed international tensions. The past two decades have seen shifts between resource security (i.e. routine policies seeking to achieve stable, economically efficient, resilient, and sustainable resource management) and resource securitisation (i.e. exceptional policies invoking national security, climate emergency, and geopolitical imperatives). Focusing on two empirical cases – critical minerals and oil & gas – we suggest that the rapid pace and relative ease of these shifts reflect a state of latent securitisation, whereby the securitisation of particular objects is facilitated by the existing security constructions embedded in their materialities and imaginaries. Examining how securitisation takes material form – and how material processes become securitised – complements discursive approaches in critical security studies, while also highlighting the tangible impacts of securitisation and security discourse on material practices.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.114
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.313 · 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