MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413831071 · doi:10.1007/s11625-025-01726-3

Grounding critical minerals in values-centred approaches for just sustainability transitions

2025· article· en· W4413831071 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

VenueSustainability Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersCommonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation
KeywordsSustainabilityLandscape ecologySustainable developmentSustainability scienceEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningEarth scienceEnvironmental scienceEnvironmental ethicsEcologyGeologySocial sustainabilityBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Growing demand for critical minerals to accelerate a global energy transition presents new challenges and opportunities for responsible mine exploration and mine development. Social innovations have not kept pace with investment in mineral development, putting the wellbeing and rights of Indigenous peoples and local communities at risk. Historical and ongoing injustices mean that without pro-active attention to these issues, critical mineral development may cause social and environmental harm and exacerbate existing inequalities. The 2022 Values Assessment conducted by the Intergovernmental Panel of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES-VA) shows that transitions towards just and sustainable futures depend on recognising and embedding diverse values into decision-making processes across all domains, including mining. Values-centred approaches seek to identify diverse and under-represented values and activate values-centred leverage points to overcome barriers, shift power, and explore alternative pathways towards justice and sustainability. In this paper, we argue that the governance of critical mineral development can learn from values-centred approaches to inform responsible and inclusive mining and exploration. We outline how values-centred approaches might help to address current shortfalls in mineral resource governance, and identify promising examples of activating values-centred leverage-points drawing from global examples. We critically advance values-centred approaches by considering power, knowledge, and capabilities, while also acknowledging the need for pragmatism in improving mineral resource governance. We identify potential change mechanisms for integrating values into policy and practice and call for more attention to plural values in the exploration and development of critical minerals for just transitions.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.442
Threshold uncertainty score0.733

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.267 · 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