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 OpenAlexaff
Hari Har Jnawali

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations3
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEthnicitiesSame topicSociopolitical Dynamics in NepalFrench-language works237,207