MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1528501522 · doi:10.4000/vertigo.13669

Peuples autochtones et patrimonialisation de la nature protégée : les San indésirables dans le « Central Kalahari » (Botswana) ?

2013· article· fr· W1528501522 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Éric Glon, Andy Chebanne

Bibliographic record

VenueVertigO · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAfrican Botany and Ecology Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Si la patrimonialisation de la nature protégée s’appuie de plus en plus sur l’idée de la participation des peuples autochtones au niveau international, l’exemple du « Central Kalahari Game Reserve » (CKGR) contredit cette tendance. Les San y sont déplacés vers des camps forcés. New Xade est l’un d’entre eux. Les San sont contraints de s’adapter à une sédentarisation rapide et violente. La question est de savoir quel sens nous pouvons donner à cet ethnocide en cours. Une appropriation territoriale et un système de valeurs patrimonialisées autochtones sont remplacés par une repatrimonialisation autour de la conservation de la nature et des nouvelles opportunités de profits qu’elles génèrent tels un tourisme de luxe et la mise en « defens » des réserves de diamants. Cette politique est ancrée sur des différends traditionnels entre les Bantous et les San.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations6
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertigOSame topicAfrican Botany and Ecology StudiesFrench-language works237,207