An Introduction to Global Perspectives on Social Justice and Human Rights
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The following chapters explore social justice and human rights in relation to Indigenous peoples in Australia and internationally. This chapter uses case studies to explore how some nations, such as New Zealand, Canada and the US, have dealt with Indigenous people's rights. There are an estimated 370 million Indigenous people worldwide living in around 70 different nations (UN Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues 2006). Indigenous peoples have borne the heavy impacts of colonialism. Though invasion or colonisation tended to occur in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, its legacies continue to affect Indigenous peoples today in many ways, such as: the lack of recognition of their rights to their lands and waters; their right to live as they desire and to maintain their cultures; their experiences of racism; and their socioeconomic position. They have challenged colonialism and its impacts on them, and fought hard to protect their rights. Situations vary across communities, depending on the timing of colonialism and subsequent treaties (or lack thereof), as well as domestic government policy. Socioeconomic indicators show the ongoing impacts of colonialism in the present living conditions of Indigenous people. They are markers of the relative position of a group to the rest of a nation's population, in areas such as levels of education, health, employment, income, experience of law and justice, housing and service access. These show that Indigenous peoples worldwide experience major disadvantage compared with their fellow citizens.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.003 |
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".