Fracturas extractivistas en el desierto de Atacama: Un oasis de contradicciones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este artículo examina las « fracturas » socioecológicas que emergen de la extracción de litio en el Salar de Atacama, una vasta formación salina de gran altitud en la cordillera de los Andes chilenos, considerada una de las reservas de litio más ricas del mundo. Conceptualizado como un « oasis de contradicciones, » el territorio del Atacama—definido por su cuenca hidrográfica—es simultáneamente un enclave estratégico para la transición energética « verde » global y un espacio de creciente despojo, donde las demandas transnacionales de litio colisionan con las territorialidades indígenas. Basado en la ecología política y en un trabajo de campo extenso con comunidades Lickanantay, este estudio propone entender las « fracturas » como disrupciones multidimensionales—ecológicas, culturales y políticas—provocadas por dinámicas extractivistas. Al analizar los impactos socioecológicos de la minería « verde, » visibilizados a través de la resistencia indígena y las demandas territoriales en el altiplano andino, nuestra investigación desafía las lógicas dominantes del desarrollo y aboga por marcos de gobernanza basados en la justicia socioambiental y la resiliencia comunitaria.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".