The Two Sides of Pascua Lama: Social Protest, Institutional Responses, and Feedback Loops
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article shows that the ability of activists to achieve outcomes that they value is fundamentally conditioned by how bureaucracies implement policies and regulations. Relatively minor changes to bureaucratic policies, regulatory enforcement, or judicial oversight – in a context of rule of law and institutional capacity to implement – can generate new opportunities and feedback loops that increase the influence of social movements over extractive sector governance, even when other political and legislative opportunities are closed. In this regard, despite the failure of glacier legislation in Chile, increased bureaucratic and judicial responsiveness enhanced the ability of social activists to attain their goals via direct access to regulatory agencies. In Argentina, the fragmented federal system allowed the passage of legislation to conserve glaciers, yet prevented effective implementation of the law. Resumen: Los dos lados de Pascua Lama: protesta social, respuesta institucional y circuitos de retroalimentaciónEl artículo muestra que la capacidad de los activistas de alcanzar resultados que valoran está fundamentalmente condicionado por la manera en la que la burocracia aplica las políticas y las regulaciones. Cambios relativamente menores de políticas burocráticas, aplicación regulatoria, o la supervisión judicial, en un contexto de estado de derecho y capacidad institucional, puede generar nuevas oportunidades y circuitos de retroalimentación que aumentan la influencia de los movimientos sociales sobre la gobernanza del sector extractivo, incluso cuando se encuentran cerradas otras oportunidades políticas y legislativas. En este sentido, a pesar del fracaso de la legislación sobre glaciares en Chile, el aumento de la capacidad de respuesta burocrática y judicial mejoró la capacidad de los activistas socio-ambientales sociales para alcanzar sus objetivos a través del acceso directo a las agencias reguladoras. En Argentina, el sistema federal fragmentado permitió la aprobación de leyes para conservar los glaciares, pero impidió la implementación efectiva de la ley.
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 | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".