MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2987558813 · doi:10.1177/1177180119885199

Implementation of Indigenous environmental heritage rights: an experience with Laitu Khyeng Indigenous community, Chittagong Hill Tracts, Bangladesh

2019· article· en· W2987558813 on OpenAlexaff
Ranjan Datta

Bibliographic record

VenueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Heritage Management and Preservation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Regina
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousMultinational corporationState (computer science)Indigenous rightsColonialismCultural heritageTraditional knowledgeGeographyPolitical scienceEnvironmental planningCultural heritage managementEnvironmental ethicsEthnologyEnvironmental protectionEconomic growthEnvironmental resource managementSociologyArchaeologyLawEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is undeniable that the global environmental crisis disproportionally affects individuals and communities, particularly Indigenous communities are among those most deeply affected. The history of Chittagong Hill Tracts Bangladesh colonialism is a history of the dispossession of Indigenous peoples of the lands that they and their ancestors have inhabited and cared for and of the imposition on them of destructive “development” policies. This paper addresses the ongoing environmental heritage conflict between the Laitu Khyeng Indigenous community’s traditional environmental management practices and state development projects in Chittagong Hill Tract. Drawing from a relational research methodology, this study shows how the nation-state controls Indigenous land, water, and management practices through multinational agencies. This paper asks, “In CHT, why must Indigenous cultural heritage be connected to the past, present, and future to invoke state legal protection?” and “How can we move toward a more rights-based approach to heritage management?”

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.203
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.004
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.241 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAlterNative An International Journal of Indigenous PeoplesSame topicCultural Heritage Management and PreservationFrench-language works237,207