MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415717595 · doi:10.1016/j.polgeo.2025.103434

Extimate nature: Environmental crisis and the Excluded

2025· article· en· W4415717595 on OpenAlexaff
Ilan Kapoor

Bibliographic record

VenuePolitical Geography · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and Politics
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSubalternPoliticsCommonsPolitical ecologyPsychoanalytic theoryEnvironmental crisisOrder (exchange)Poverty

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Drawing on the Lacanian notion of “extimacy,” which denotes that which is both intimate and exterior, this article aims to contribute to the bourgeoning field of psychoanalytic political ecology by emphasizing two extimate features: the instability of—or extimacy in—the socionatural world, rendering impossible notions of natural unity or harmony; and the priority of the Excluded, viewed as symptomatic of—extimate to—the ills of global capitalism: those upon which the System vitally depends yet repudiates. The article dwells on the crucial linkage between these two extimate elements—socionature's volatility and subaltern politics—asking what it might entail in our age of ecological crisis. What political-ecological structures would need to be in place for addressing ecological turbulence, while also tackling the socioeconomic antagonisms that produce the Excluded? And how might the social and environmental commons have to be regulated to better ensure that the subaltern does not pay the highest price in order that the wealthiest pay the lowest? By addressing these questions through the lens of extimacy, the article probes the emancipatory potential of political ecology.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.038
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0000.007
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.294 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venuePolitical GeographySame topicPsychoanalysis, Philosophy, and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207