MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4309321325 · doi:10.1177/14687968221135943

Indian intervention in ethnic movement of Nepal: Did Madheshi lose or gain?

2022· article· en· W4309321325 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEthnicities · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSociopolitical Dynamics in Nepal
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)PoliticsPolitical scienceIntervention (counseling)ConstitutionDevelopment economicsMainstreamPolitical economyLawEconomic growthSociologyEconomicsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the impact of Indian intervention on the Madheshi parties’ claim to self-determination in Nepal. In 2007, the Madheshi parties launched mass protests, demanding the recognition of their self-determination through an autonomous Madheshi province. Mainstream political parties became hesitant to incorporate this demand. The Nepalese government signed agreements with the agitating Madheshis but did not intend to implement its commitments. The Indian government was monitoring these developments; it stood on the Madheshi side and urged the Nepalese government to recognize self-determination and autonomy in the new Constitution. It increased pressure through press releases, parliamentary statements, bilateral visits, and an undeclared economic sanction. Against this background, this paper examines the following question: What is the impact of the Indian intervention on the Madheshi claims for self-determination in Nepal? It identifies that the Indian intervention obstructed the recognition of Madheshi self-determination as a constitutional right and the agenda of the nationalist movement. The mainstream political parties perceived the Indian intervention as unwanted interference in a sovereign state’s internal affairs and responded to this pressure by adopting the Constitution without including self-determination. The Indian government continued to pressure through economic sanctions, but the latter just increased anti-Indian sentiments in Nepal. As a result, the Nepalese government re-strengthened its ties with the Chinese government and concluded trade and transit agreements. The Indian government perceived that Nepal-China ties would affect its national interests in Nepal and stayed silent about the Madheshi parties. This silence constructed a permissive environment for the Nepalese government to ignore the nationalist demands and forced the Madheshi parties to concede their self-determination as the ethnonational agenda.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.407
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.329 · 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