Framing climate change and indigenous peoples
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines representations of indigenous peoples in Swedish and Canadian press coverage of the Copenhagen climate summit (COP15). It discusses tensions between the international character of UN summits and the often transnational character of indigenous peoples as well as the issue of climate change. It considers how conceptions of nature, culture and politics intersect in the coverage, and in what roles indigenous peoples appear. Building on theories concerning the representation of indigenous peoples, traditional environmental knowledge (TEK) and identity politics, the study combines content and framing analysis with discourse analysis of a small sample of articles about indigenous peoples. Indigenous peoples are underrepresented in the coverage. When indigenous voices emerge they appear as victim-heroes and important intermediaries of urgency and spirituality. They also appear as intermediaries of de-nationalization, but they are misframed politically, recognized in terms of their culture rather than represented in terms of their status.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it