100% toxic: A review of the environmental history of toxins and toxicity in Aotearoa New Zealand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last three decades, scholars have produced a large body of work showcasing how people have engaged with the environments of Aotearoa New Zealand culturally, politically, intellectually, and economically. This diversity in perspective is perhaps best exemplified by the 2002 anthology Environmental Histories of New Zealand edited by Eric Pawson and Tom Brooking, and of which a new edition, Making a New Land: Environmental Histories of New Zealand, was published in 2013.[i] Nevertheless, there remain perspectives largely absent in New Zealand environmental historiography. Foremost among them are matters of toxins and toxicity. Indeed, while the Waitangi Tribunal has shed light on the impacts of toxins in some of its reports, for example how sewage discharge and industrial waste have polluted traditional fishing grounds, scholarship conducted outside the Waitangi Tribunal has been largely limited to expose the hypocrisy of marketing slogans like “100% Pure New Zealand” by showcasing how agricultural and industrial practices have polluted and continue to pollute lands, lakes and rivers.[ii] [i] Eric Pawson and Tom Brooking, eds., Environmental Histories of New Zealand (Melbourne: Oxford University Press, 2002); Eric Pawson and Tom Brooking, eds., Making a New Land: Environmental Histories of New Zealand (Dunedin: Otago University Press, 2013). See also Tom Brooking, Eric Pawson, et. al., Seeds of Empire: The Environmental Transformation of New Zealand, new edition (London: Bloomsbury, 2020). [ii] See, for example: Jonathan West, “Mirrors on the Land: Histories of New Zealand Lakes,” Journal of New Zealand Studies NS30 (2020): 2-37; Catherine Knight, Beyond Manapouri: 50 Years of Environmental Politics in New Zealand (Christchurch: Canterbury University Press, 2018); Catherine Knight, New Zealand’s rivers: An Environmental History (Christchurch: Canterbury University Press); Terry Hearn, “Mining the quarry,” in Making a New Land: Environmental Histories of New Zealand, ed. Eric Pawson and Tom Brooking (Dunedin: Otago University Press, 2013), 106-121; Tom Brooking and Vaughan Wood, “The grassland revolution reconsidered,” in Making a New Land: Environmental Histories of New Zealand, ed. Eric Pawson and Tom Brooking (Dunedin: Otago University Press, 2013), 193-208; Nicola Wheen, “An updated history of New Zealand environmental law,” in Making a New Land: Environmental Histories of New Zealand, ed. Eric Pawson and Tom Brooking (Dunedin: Otago University Press, 2013), 277-292; Michael J. Stevens, “Ngāi Tahu and the ‘nature’ of Māori modernity,” in Making a New Land: Environmental Histories of New Zealand, ed. Eric Pawson and Tom Brooking (Dunedin: Otago University Press, 2013), 293-309. For instances where the Waitangi Tribunal have studied the impact of toxins, see, for example Waitangi Tribunal, The Report of the Waitangi Tribunal on the Motunui-Waitara claim (Wai 6), second edition (Wellington: The Tribunal, 1989) and Waitangi Tribunal, Report of the Waitangi Tribunal on the Manukau claim (Wai 8), second edition, (Wellington: The Tribunal, 1989).
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".