Ecocriticism and Climate Fiction in Contemporary Anglophone Literature: Narrative, Ethics, and the Anthropocene
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ecocriticism, as a critical framework, interrogates the relationship between literature and the environment, foregrounding ecological concerns and challenging anthropocentric paradigms. In recent decades, the rise of climate fiction (“cli‑fi”) has expanded the scope of ecocritical inquiry, offering imaginative responses to the global climate crisis. This paper examines the intersections of ecocriticism and climate fiction in contemporary Anglophone literature, situating them within broader cultural, political, and ethical discourses. Drawing on novels, essays, and speculative narratives by authors such as Amitav Ghosh, Margaret Atwood, Kim Stanley Robinson, and Barbara Kingsolver, the study highlights how literary texts articulate ecological anxieties, dramatize climate catastrophe, and envision alternative futures. The methodology involves a qualitative review of primary texts alongside secondary scholarship, synthesizing theoretical perspectives from environmental humanities, postcolonial studies, and narrative theory. The discussion emphasizes three thematic strands: (1) the representation of climate change as lived experience, (2) the role of narrative form in shaping ecological consciousness, and (3) the ethical imperative of literature in the Anthropocene. Ultimately, the paper argues that contemporary Anglophone climate fiction not only reflects environmental crises but also functions as a catalyst for ecological awareness and activism. By bridging ecocriticism and cli‑fi, literature becomes a vital site for reimagining human‑nature relations and fostering sustainable futures.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".