Development-induced interventions and socio-cultural transitions among the tribes of North-East India
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines development-induced interventions and their socio-cultural impacts on tribal populations in Northeast India. It highlights the profound socio-cultural transitions, including cultural dilution and acculturation, which have been longstanding concerns for these communities. The analysis traces the roots of these transitions to British colonialism and its dominant policies, which fostered economic stratification, the spread of Western knowledge, and political administration. These policies facilitated the processes of cultural erosion and the loss of Indigenous identity. Furthermore, the article explores how geographical and geopolitical tensions, particularly those associated with military presence, cross-border interactions, and inadequate state policies, have exacerbated socio-cultural transitions and fuelled ethnopolitical movements. It also examines the role of technological advancements in driving socio-cultural shifts, acknowledging their mixed impact. While technology has contributed to economic and social progress, it has also led to displacement, loss of land and Indigenous rights, and cultural assimilation. One notable example is the influence of ‘Koreanisation,’ which fosters multiculturalism and challenges traditional cultural identities. In conclusion, the article underscores the importance of balancing development initiatives with preserving cultural heritage. Ensuring this equilibrium is crucial in addressing the needs of tribal communities, allowing for progress without undermining cultural integrity.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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".