MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7056112170

Different Means to an End: Exploring the Methods and Objectives of the Youth Climate Movement

2022· other· en· W7056112170 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2022
Typeother
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicLaser Design and Applications
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeSocial movementPolitical economy of climate changeYouth studiesScope (computer science)Focus groupScale (ratio)Sociocultural evolution
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In September 2019, streets across the world filled with millions of children and youth demanding climate action, demonstrating the growing concern young people feel about their futures (Taylor, Watts, & Bartlett, 2019). However, protests are only one of the methods youths use to show their dissatisfaction with current climate change policies. Youth are also utilizing education, entrepreneurship, civil disobedience, legal actions, and many more methods to influence and challenge the social and economic system (O’Brien et al., 2018). \n \nWhile youth have gained increasing attention in popular media, their voices are still largely absent from the climate change literature (Petrasek MacDonald et al., 2013). The studies that have been done on the youth climate movement tend to focus on only one form of activism, often student strikes, and do not feature the youth activists themselves. This study is a cross-sectional, qualitative analysis on an organizational scale to examine the methods, objectives, and values of organizations in the youth climate movement in Canada. Nine leaders from eight youth-driven or focused climate change organizations utilizing different forms of activism participated in semi-structured individual interviews. \n \nThe key goals of the youth climate movement appeared to be centered around solving the climate crisis, uplifting and empowering youth voices, achieving climate justice, changing policies and systems, and building networks and relationships. Furthermore, these goals and values are influenced by science, emotions, and sociocultural factors. The methods or tactics utilized ranged from protest to filmmaking- Overall, it appears that the movement is rather wide both in its scope and its choice of methods for change. \n \nThese findings add much to the youth climate movement and social movement literature, even with this study’s limited scope. It gives a better understanding of the movement in Canada, offers a broader understanding of the movement by analyzing more than one form of activism, and it gives youth a voice in the literature. It also demonstrates how understanding youth as a form of marginalization is an important part of understanding the youth climate movement and how youth utilize this movement to renegotiate negative stereotypes about their civic engagement.

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)0.028
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.171
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0280.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0210.025
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0030.010
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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.190 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueQSpace (Queen's University Library)→Same topicLaser Design and Applications→French-language works237,207→