Indigenous Mobilisation and the Law of Consultation in Peru: A Boomerang Pattern?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prior to 2009, it was difficult to speak of a national level Indigenous movement in Peru with an impact on national politics. However, the situation changed after the tragic events known as the Baguazo. Little by little, diverse organisations representing different ethnic groups came together to push for a law of consultation, which was promulgated in 2011. Nevertheless, the process has been highly complex and is still ongoing. The aim of this article is to offer some interpretative clues in order to understand how the national level movement came about, as well as how it made an impact on national political processes. Referring to social movement theory and constructivist international relations theory, I analyse several important episodes between 2009 and 2013. I find that both the convergence and the impact of a national level Indigenous movement in Peru are embedded in complex bargaining processes in which issues of ethnicity and political opportunities at the national level have been affected by the leverage of global norms (specifically the International Labour Organisation’s Covenant No. 169) by both international and national actors.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".