Hāloa: The long breath of Hawaiian sovereignty, water rights, and Indigenous law
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores how Native Hawaiian–led efforts to protect sacred lands and waters reveal forms of Indigenous survivance and resistance to the logics of settler colonialism. These forms range in visibility from direct protest to the perpetuation of Indigenous practices, values, and knowledge systems. Inspired by movements for social justice on the North American continent, the Hawaiian Renaissance of the 1970s saw a reawakening of pride in Hawaiian culture within the context of the rapid changes brought by statehood in 1959. In response to the forceful thrust of Americanization and physical displacement of rural communities, young Native Hawaiians rose to defend their right to live as Hawaiians in their own homeland. As a result of the activism of the Hawaiian Renaissance, the 1978 Constitutional Convention reaffirmed Native Hawaiian rights previously codified by Kingdom law, which included a unique public trust doctrine grounded in Indigenous land and water management. My research is guided by the moʻolelo (oral histories) of nā kūpuna who were once the “radical” activists of the Hawaiian Renaissance. Their stories shed light on a history unaccounted for in standard textbooks and reveal a genealogy of Native Hawaiian resistance that was reawakened under the banner of Aloha ‘Āina (reciprocal love of land).
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".