Territorial justice as structural justice: settler colonialism and territorial rights theory
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
This paper challenges the dominant paradigm that territorial justice in settler-colonial states like Canada is a matter of distributive justice. Instead, it argues that theorists should embrace the dominant paradigm in Indigenous political thought and the critical theory that territorial justice is a matter of structural justice. This is because the structural paradigm focuses on how Indigenous and settler jurisdictions are constructed in relation to each other, and the conditions required to change this relationship. To make this argument, I highlight three worries for the distributive paradigm in settler-colonial states and show how a structural paradigm can address them. The first concerns the feasibility of implementing just distributions in contexts of structural injustice. The second concerns the distributive paradigm’s ability to describe how Indigenous and settler jurisdictions relate to each other. The third concerns how it justifies jurisdictional rights. I conclude by considering the new directions for territorial rights theory that the structural paradigm proposes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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