Island identities? Comparing the perceptions of islanders towards governing institutions and quality of life
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we seek to shed light on issues related to satisfaction with government institutions and personal quality of life from living on an island, teasing out common themes to determine whether there is a shared identity among islanders, regardless of geography, level of development and size, as it relates to governance. We explore these qualities in six different groups of island residents across ten islands or archipelagos, ranging in size, location and governance features. Half are sovereign states and the rest are subnational island jurisdictions: Tobago (Trinidad & Tobago), Grenada, Prince Edward Island (Canada), St. Lucia, Lesvos (Greece), Cyprus, Newfoundland (Canada), Iceland, Reunion (France) and Mauritius. Using a Likert-type questionnaire, island participants were asked about the factors that constitute “quality of life” on their islands, with a particular focus on governance. The construction of composite indicators from survey questions and cluster analysis allows us to compare the attitudes within and between different groups of islands and stakeholder groups. Results suggest that, despite significant contextual variances among stakeholders and island locations and situations, some common threads run through all groups and all islands, related to the group the respondents were classified in. These threads comprise a rough basis for a deeper understanding of island identities.
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".