Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book brings together very insightful analyses of indigenous experience and strategies in the context of globalization from several continents and a number of theoretical perspectives. There are broad similarities making this a common struggle but the solutions arise from people solving problems in local contexts. Read this book and you will see that the debate is a very important one for the furtherance of human rights, for the future of these ancient traditions, and for the promotion of cultural, political and economic diversity everywhere. — Grand Chief Dr Ted Moses, Grand Council of the Crees (Eeyou Istchee) Indigenous peoples today are enmeshed in the expanding modern economy, subject to the pressures of both market and government. This book takes indigenous peoples as actors, not victims, as its starting point in analyzing this interaction. It assembles a rich diversity of statements, case studies, and wider thematic explorations, primarily from North America, and particularly the Cree, the Haudenausaunee (Iroquois), and Chippewa-Ojibwe peoples who straddle the US/Canada border, but also from South America and the former Soviet Union. It explores the complex relationships between indigenous peoples’ organizations, civil society, and the environment. It shows how the boundaries between indigenous peoples’ organizations, civil society, the state, markets, development, and the environment are ambiguous and constantly changing. These complexities create both opportunities and threats for local agency. People resist or react to the pressures of market and state, while sustaining “life projects” of their own, embodying their own local history, visions, and strategies.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.004 |
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".