Aboriginal-Social Justice Alliances: Understanding the Landscape of Relationships through the Coalition for a Public Inquiry into Ipperwash
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite their growing popularity, alliances and coalitions between Indigenous peoples and other actors fighting for social and environmental justice have been little documented or analyzed. Alliances form often in the context of land and resource disputes, struggles against discrimination and racism, and other areas of life where there are grounds for strategic co-operation. Using grounded theory and resource mobilization theory, this study examines relationships between social justice and Indigenous activists who formed the "Coalition for a Public Inquiry into Ipperwash", a social justice struggle in Ontario, Canada. The authors analyze participants' narratives noting their understandings of their relationships, strengths and tensions, and lessons learned. It is apparent that Indigenous and social movement alliances represent an exceptional site of encounter and transformation, always in the shadow of ongoing colonization and the movement to Indigenous self-determination. The Coalition provides a window into complex relationships that are forming across Canada and globally.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.044 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".