Culturally sustainable development: Maya culture, indigenous institutions, and alternative development in Guatemala
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
Recent scholarship has highlighted the ways in which new models of international and community development have been emerging in Latin America. Many of these have been associated with the idea of indigeneity. This article is meant to contribute to the larger attempt to understand this new turn in development thinking by studying one such model—enacted on a community level under the moniker of “culturally sustainable development” by a Maya organization in Guatemala. The case study and institutional ethnography exemplify the ways in which community development can be culturally situated, yet broadly informed. It also illuminates how the post-Washington consensus development policy environment provides opportunities for alternative indigenous development models at the same time as it imposes potentially debilitating constraints. Finally, it is argued that indigenous organizations often act in ways that are transmodern as opposed to anti-modern and that this transmodern positioning has allowed for some success in asserting alternative concepts of development and shaking free some of the snares of the global post-Washington consensus development policy climate.
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 | 0.000 | 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 it