MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1621422478 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2010.9669284

Operationalizing Free, Prior, and Informed Consent in the Extractive Industry Sector? Examining the Challenges of a Negotiated Model of Justice

2010· article· en· W1621422478 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOperationalizationCorporate governanceIndigenousPolitical scienceEconomic JusticePublic administrationSociologyPublic relationsEnvironmental ethicsLawManagementEpistemologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Free, prior, and informed consent (FPIC) is a key principle being promoted in an attempt to reshape a broad family of governance regimes designed to address the local consequences of extractive industry development in indigenous territory. This article explores the development of the principle of FPIC and the challenges that it presents to conventional forms of governance. FPIC is examined as a form of negotiated justice that aims to produce regulatory decisions through horizontal and decentralized forms of engagement. The article seeks to develop and clarify issues in building a critical research agenda on the operationalization of FPIC.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.440
Threshold uncertainty score0.656

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.144 · 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