MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385193519 · doi:10.1590/1982-0259.2023.e90496

Peasant women and the gendered inequalities in the industry of mining

2023· article· en· W4385193519 on OpenAlexaff
Rafael Fernandes de Mesquita, Alexandra Denise Sophie Marie Carlier Larsimont, André Xavier, Fátima Regina Ney Matos

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Katálysis · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeasantInvisibilityPoliticsFocus groupSocial inequalityMining industryCitizen journalismResource (disambiguation)InequalityCorporate governancePolitical sciencePolitical ecologySociologyEconomic growthBusinessEconomicsEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The mining industry in Peru - as well as in many resource-rich countries of the global South - is of great economic and social importance, particularly in remote regions where mineral deposits are often located. The academic literature has so far neglected analysing how women in these regions are affected by the industry. As such, it is relevant to study the gendered conflict surrounding the activity and invisibility of women in the mining industry, as well as their proposals, demands, and needs, with a focus on environmental and social concerns. This study analysed the experiences of peasant women from Peruvian Andes communities in environmental governance processes in mining contexts as they sought to exercise their citizenship within the mining industry and public spaces. Using a qualitative approach involving a focus group and panel discussions, the experiences and perceptions of the women who are part of the participatory environmental monitoring and surveillance committees (PEMSC) were considered. This paper highlights gendered inequalities concerning the benefits of mining, the process of change in the social dynamics of mining communities, and political claims for a better social arrangement, with social, political, economic, and ecological considerations from the women’s point of view.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.106
Threshold uncertainty score0.169

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.202 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista KatálysisSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207