Travellers, land management, and the political ecology of marginalisation in Celtic-Tiger Ireland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Irish Travellers were once an itinerant population on the island of Ireland, but are now predominantly sedentary and urbanised. Their longstanding horsekeeping practices have become subject to increased management and regulation in the Republic. Nominally introduced in the interest of safeguarding the well-being of horses, the policing of horsekeeping has also served as an instrument of surveillance and marginalisation, and has had a culturally and economically severe impact on the Traveller community. This paper argues that the policing of Travellers who keep horses has its roots in a larger transformation of rural landscapes, led by the Irish state as part of an economic plan of modernised dairy and beef production for an international market. The spatial transformation of rural areas was intensified further during the Celtic Tiger (1994-2008), when the central government’s transfer of responsibilities to under resourced local authorities combined with property speculation and new environmental regulation from the European Union to produce new land management discourse and practices at the local level. Land was understood to have new and lucrative potential for development and, although they often managed it badly, local authorities increased their oversight and policing of previously flexible or ‘disorderly’ land. These evolving frameworks and practices of land management and oversight served to marginalise communities whose ties to land were insecure, such as Travellers who kept horses.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".