Globalization, Knowledge Economy and the implication for Indigenous Knowledge
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper considers the impact that globalization and the knowledge economy have on the protection and promotion of indigenous knowledge. It is asserted that globalization and the knowledge economy have opened up the world and facilitated the flow of information and knowledge. However, the flow of knowledge has been governed by uneven economic and political power between the developed countries and the devel-oping countries. This has a number of ramifications for IK. The dilemma faced is that whichever method is taken to protect IK (IPR regimes, documenting IK etc) exposes IK to some misappropriation. Protecting it through IPR is also fraught with problems. Documenting IK exposes IK to the public domain and makes it that much easier to be misused. However, not protecting IK runs the danger of having it disappear as the custodians holding it die off, or as communities become swamped by the effects of globalization. The conclu-sion therefore is that governments have to take more interest in protecting, promoting and using IK than they have been doing.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| 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".