MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7061135226

The Pest We All Live With: Cultural Meaning and the Life and Death of Rats

2021· other· en· W7061135226 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeScholarship (California Digital Library) · 2021
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnographySocial controlMeaning (existential)Participant observationScholarshipTypologyContext (archaeology)Everyday life
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This dissertation examines the cultural meaning of some of our least-loved nonhuman companions: rats. Scholarship in sociology and other humanities and social sciences disciplines has increasingly sought to treat nonhuman animals as important participants in social processes, rather than superficial window dressing on the periphery of the human social world. I extend this work by examining a specifically antagonistic relationship between humans and animals, namely rat extermination. This topic, I argue, has important lessons to impart regarding social relationships with the nonhuman world and nature, despite being overlooked due to rats’ generally negative associations and the unpleasantness of the killing involved in extermination.My study is primarily based on a multi-sited ethnography featuring participant observation and semi-structured interviews in three locations: the Canadian province of Alberta, Downtown Los Angeles, California, and Ecuador’s Galápagos Islands. These three sites represent a typology of landscapes (rural, urban, and island) where the practice of rat control proceeds in varying ways and for varying motivations. In rural places like Alberta, rat control is a measure taken to guard against economic losses by preventing rats from contaminating agricultural yields and draining the resources of farmers. In urban areas, rats prevent a public health risk as vectors for infectious diseases. Finally, on islands, rats are targeted for eradication for environmental conservation purposes by organizations hoping to protect native species and their habitats.\nBeyond these general differences related to their landscapes, each of my specific cases has a particular relationship between the rat control and the social and cultural context within which it occurs. In Alberta, a government program inspects farms near the border with neighboring Saskatchewan to guard its decades-long claim to province-wide “rat-free” status. This program, I find, clarifies Alberta’s geographic borders and the boundaries of its collective cultural identity by resonating with broader cultural currents of nativism and opposition to outside influence. Los Angeles’s Civic Center, meanwhile, had a widely reported rat infestation in 2019, prompting a multi-pronged government response. I find that LA’s rat issues are inseparable in the public imagination from the city’s homeless crisis, which was specifically cited as a cause of the infestation. The attempts to simultaneously address both these issues attempt to secure public faith in the notion of a clean separation between “inside” and “outside.” Finally, rats are one of many invasive species targeted by a group of NGOs in the Galápagos Islands, in programs aimed at preventing the extinction of native species. These programs raise deep ethical questions around what interventions are morally justified for the goals of environmental stewardship.\nWith these three separate empirical investigations, I advance two overarching arguments: First, rat control is a social practice that draws and clarifies the boundaries of nature and society, and second, rat control enforces an implicit hierarchy of living things that mirrors and is entangled with social inequalities. Together, these findings demand that we extend the lessons of environmental justice, the notion that the burden of environmental problems fall disproportionately on already marginalized populations, to the cultural imaginations of nature and environmentalism itself.\n

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)0.003
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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.042
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.229
Teacher spread0.213 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeScholarship (California Digital Library)→Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion research→French-language works237,207→