Foreign mining, law and the privatization of property: a case study from Peru
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on the convergence of the corporate power of Yanacocha Mine with the Peruvian State's public power, studied in relation to two interrelated and fundamental sites of power: Indigenous land rights and the regulation of the use of force. The analysis presents two international human rights litigation initiatives: the Negritos Case and the GRUFIDES Case, which illustrate the complex relationship between Peru's colonial history, Yanacocha's current status as one of the most profitable goldmines in the world, serious land rights violations, and the emergence of widespread social protest and the escalating use of private security companies by multinational mining companies. The analysis addresses four legal processes flowing from the private–public convergence: (1) the dispossession of Campesino communal land; (2) the production of Campesino consent; (3) the privatization of coercive force; and (4) the absence of effective legal remedies. The conclusion considers the significance of the case study for those who seek to use the law to engage in practices of resistance to the power configuration represented by the private–public convergence.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".