Insular Perspectives of the State: Territorial Policy and Management as Seen From Guaitecas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
State intervention in island areas often focuses on their shortcomings and limitations, defining them in terms of backwardness. This approach legitimises top-down territorial integration initiatives that disregard the expectations and knowledge of local residents. One consequence of this approach is centre-periphery dynamics increasing gaps in island contexts, reducing its relevance in political, economic, and social terms. The prevalence of state interventions decided from the continent reinforces a sense of distance and difference. In this paper, we propose a definition of islandness based on three interrelated arguments: identity, political, and territorial. From there, we highlight their impact on the political sentiments that develop in these contexts, which are often marked by a sense of territorial identity, dissatisfaction with experiences involving the state, and a struggle to control the local agenda. In a case study of the Guaitecas Archipelago in southern Chile, we conducted semi-structured interviews with 39 local people between September 2021 and October 2022. Respondents shared their characterisations of the state, their expectations in terms of its role, the relationship between the public sector and local politics, and the informal practices that emerge through adaptation of standardised mechanisms devised on the mainland.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".