Responding to a Deeply Bifurcated World. Indigenous Diplomacies in the 21st Century
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The final ratification of the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) in November 2007 marked a certain culmination of the re-configuring of the relationship between Indigenous peoples and colonizing states over several decades. It represents the triumph of the determination, persistence and agency of Indigenous peoples who have struggled unceasingly to win recognition of their rights and of injustices perpetuated through acts of imperialism which many argue continue today. It also drew a line in the sand between states who choose to acknowledge the rights of Indigenous peoples to be recognized and identified as having specific rights within international law, and those who refuse to recognize these rights outside of their juridical frameworks. the intersection of particular global and local interests is redefining Indigenous diplomacies and ontologies in ways that have important political and ethical consequences and which are notably bifurcated. Overarching these bifurcations are rapid and significant changes to the national and international juridical frameworks, particularly with regard to juridical interpretations of self-determination and rights. These points of bifurcation are explored in this chapter which argues for the re-locating of Indigenous philosophies and ontologies at the centre of Indigenous diplomacies.
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 | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.058 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".