Amplifying voices of development: Insights from Indigenous Maya leaders of El Quiche, Guatemala.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The concept of development is under immense scrutiny. By questioning what is development and development for whom?' a re-thinking of these practices is underway throughout the world. Critical development practitioners are seriously evaluating development' to better understand the divided views between the North and South from a richly interdisciplinary perspective. In my thesis, I present findings of a recent research project in which I sought the perspectives of eight Indigenous Maya leaders of El Quiché, Guatemala. Based on interviews conducted in September 2010 in the Guatemalan highland city of Santa Cruz del Quiché and surrounding area, I attempt to better understand the meaning(s) of the word development from an Indigenous perspective, and how a self-determined vision of life best suits local communities. Based on their lived experiences, the Indigenous Maya interviewees asserted that development' practices prescribed by the local government and country's elites, as well as outside non-government organizations and multinational corporations, are not in the best interests of the Indigenous population. I attempt to highlight how the imposition of the development' itself has become, to these leaders, synonymous with forms of racism, inequality, exclusion, oppression and a loss of Indigenous identity and culture. Rather, Maya leaders in El Quiché stress the right to self-determined development, cultural preservation and a more holistic vision of life for individuals and communities. --P. ii.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.026 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".