Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study and impact of the globalisation of crime control policy and related products have recently begun to receive significant attention from critical Indigenous scholars. The reasons for the increasing focus on this issue include the restorative justice industry's increasing utilisation of so-called 'Indigenous' philosophies and practices in the design of its various products; and the increasing global popularity of supposedly 'Indigenousinspired1 restorative justice initiatives, not only in settler colonial contexts, but throughout Western jurisdictions, as a response to crime control issues relating to minorities. The purpose of this paper is to provide an Indigenous critique of the globalisation of restorative justice and the industry's utilisation of Indigenous practices, symbols and philosophies in the marketing of its products. The paper will focus on the impact that the international transfer of restorative products is having on relationships between Indigenous peoples and central governments in settler colonial jurisdictions, particularly New Zealand and Canada, and on Indigenous peoples1 drive for greater self-determination in these jurisdictions.
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 | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".