MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416907891 · doi:10.4324/9781032620862-4

Environmental Scarcity and Conflict

2025· book-chapter· en· W4416907891 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Tom Deligiannis, Rita Floyd

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTransboundary Water Resource Management
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrievanceScarcityLivelihoodClimate changePoliticsNatural resourceSocial conflictState (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This chapter reviews qualitative research on the scarcity of renewable resources and violent conflict from the 1990s and crucial debates among scholars about the findings of two key research projects in Canada and Swizerland. These research projects link human-induced scarcities of renewable resources to violent conflict indirectly, through secondary impacts such as economic and livelihood impacts, reduced state capacity, and dislocation and immiseration caused by the seizure of valuable but scarce resources. Research in the past decade on possible linkages between climate change and violent conflict have drawn on the findings from research in the 1990s to suggest how climate change can contribute to violent conflict – rarely if ever as a sole causal factor, but instead acting to worsen and aggravate existing impacts and cleavages in societies. Controversies that raged over the findings of the 1990s research around the definition of the independent variable, the causal strength of political versus environmental factors, and the debates over greed or grievance as causes of violent resource conflict remain unsettled. Some of these debates, such as the causal role of political and environmental factors have resurfaced in similar form in recent debates about the links between climate change and violent conflict.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.986
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTransboundary Water Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207