Indigenous Territorial Autonomy in Latin America: An Overview
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Miguel GonzálezMiguel González is at the International Development Studies Program, York University, 133 Founders College, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, ON, Canada M3J1P3 (Email: ).This paper offers an overview of indigenous territorial autonomy in Latin America, focusing on the various forms of recognition, legal characteristics, performance, and prospects in light of contemporary struggles of indigenous peoples in the region. The paper traces autonomy debates during the late 20th century and argues that interpretations about the origin, salience, and prospects of the autonomy demand rather than offer competing views complemented each other by stressing the convergence within indigenous social movements on the potential of autonomy as a platform of political, social, cultural, and territorial rights as well as an avenue for reconstituting the relationships between the state and indigenous peoples. Nevertheless, autonomy remains a contentious subject, at times illustrating substantial differences among indigenous organizations about its meaning, significance, and the best ways for realizing it. Recent constitutional reforms across the region, particularly in the Andean countries, show a new momentum for the inauguration of indigenous territorial autonomy. The paper observes that the current context is far from being conflict-free and that the developmentalist orientation, extractive-based economies which national governments across the region have endorsed, is threatening indigenous autonomy and potentially deems it irrelevant as a way for advancing indigenous rights.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".