Repairing Activist-Academic Relationships: Defining Methods to Improve Reciprocity and Movement Building in Degrowth
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The degrowth movement, advocating for an eco-socialist restructuring of world economies, has failed to find a political foothold in American politics. This is despite growing support in Europe and positive, yet limited, reception in Canada. Previous literature diagnoses the American degrowth movement with confused and ineffective rhetoric, inhospitable intramovement politics, and too little scholarly support. In this article, I argue differently. I focus on the relationships between academics and activists within American degrowth, understanding academic-activist relationships to be historically extractive but also generative and didactic. Using semistructured interviews with academics and activists, and discourse analysis of the press coverage of degrowth, I define the state of academic-activist relationships as severely underdeveloped and uncooperative. Finally, I find that significant reforms to higher education’s opacity, exclusivity, and extractive productivity, and that encouraging activists to proactively center their narratives in the movement, may improve the lax reciprocity and slow movement building of American degrowth.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it