MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2547270652 · doi:10.1177/0160597615603748

Development as Imperialism

2015· article· en· W2547270652 on OpenAlexaff
Timothy MacNeill

Bibliographic record

VenueHumanity & Society · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousExpansiveSanitationPoliticsTourismExploitEconomic growthFocus groupSociologyPolitical scienceEconomyEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Garifuna people of Trujillo, Honduras, wryly call it la maldición—the curse. Despite the expansive resources of the area and the sheer amount of valuable commodities that have left from its shores, most of the local people remain poor, with little access to sanitation, reliable electricity, literacy, security, or employment. This study explores the ways in which private tourism development projects conspire with national and international politics and economics to perpetuate la maldición. An analysis of 40 qualitative interviews, three focus groups, and survey data from the Trujillo area is combined with secondary historical, economic, and political data regarding the national and international processes in which local dynamics are embedded. Although past research has shown it to be possible for development projects to be designed in a way that benefits indigenous populations, in the case of Trujillo, Honduras, macroimperial, mesoimperial and microimperial processes conspire to assure that such projects exploit and marginalize instead of include and benefit local people.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.060

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.036
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.060
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.199 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations20
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHumanity & SocietySame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207