Different lenses, different lifeways: Embracing indigenous worldviews for sustainability transformations
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The climate crisis and unsustainable economic practices are reinforced by colonial values like nature instrumentalism and individualism, which shape global sustainability agendas. In contrast, Indigenous values grounded in a holistic understanding have fostered communal sustainability for centuries but remain underrepresented in sustainability practice. This paper compares Indigenous worldviews alongside modern cultural worldviews. Additionally, it examines different sustainability proposals and practical examples of Indigenous principles in policy and business settings (such as urban policy or consulting firms). Results suggest that Indigenous values linked to interconnectedness foster sustainable lifestyles and community and nature protection. However, values that disrupt human-nature connections hinder sustainability transformations. Contributing to the literature gap on worldviews and sustainability, this work aims to bridge fragmented knowledge of Indigenous sustainability proposals by mapping their principles and providing practical examples to inform policy and practice. Ultimately, this study highlights the need to integrate Indigenous perspectives for genuine transformation in sustainability practices.
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it