The re-indigenization of humanity to Mother Earth: a learning platform to cultivate social-ecological resilience and challenge the Anthropocene.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Human beings today are living in times of unprecedented social and ecological<br/>crisis, a crisis that is to a significant degree of human making. The impending arrival of the<br/>Anthropocene geological epoch gives this crisis a name. As academics with a sense of<br/>responsibility for our relationships with planetary kin, the awareness of unfolding crisis calls<br/>on us to reach a deeper understanding of assumptions about the world, and of modes of living<br/>that these assumptions permit, which have been a human contribution to crisis. Furthermore,<br/>the Anthropocene calls us to act upon our new understanding. Taking modern European<br/>imperialism as a key generative force in the development of Anthropocene, we provocatively<br/>develop the idea in this article that the life-ways and worldviews of Indigenous Peoples<br/>colonized by European imperialism – including, potentially, marginalized and suppressed<br/>life-ways and worldviews of Indigenous Europeans – may hold critical insights by which to<br/>negotiate the Anthropocene and to challenge and change habits of thought and action that<br/>have led us to its threshold.<br/>In doing so we outline the rationale behind the Alliance for Intergenerational Resilience<br/>(AIR) whose objective is to build social-ecological resilience by connecting and supporting<br/>locally based projects for the innovative and renovative co-evolution of social and ecological<br/>systems. AIR aims to generate inter-cultural relationships between Indigenous communities<br/>and communities no longer considered indigenous to place in order to support more<br/>meaningful, life-giving social and ecological relationships for all people. In order to further<br/>describe AIR's objectives and its aspirations, the article draws on the Alliance's inaugural<br/>event, the Elders’ Voices Summit, four days of Indigenous-led sustainability education with<br/>more than 100 international participants, representing community, university, government,<br/>philanthropy and not-for-profit sectors. We conclude by casting our hopes forward to<br/>envisage future re-indigenization work that supports the connection and reconnection of<br/>human beings with the Earth and the places of the Earth to which we belong
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".