Corporate social responsibility for whom? The case of Canadian mining in Guatemala
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canadian mining companies have played a large role in mineral extraction around the world but especially in Latin America. A post-development approach is used to examine the ways in which the Canadian government and international institutions (such as the IMF and World Bank) encourage and support neoliberal reforms in post-conflict Guatemala. These reforms enable foreign investment through reduced taxes and deregulation of land tenure systems, among others, which attracts foreign mining companies. An analysis of secondary academic, media, and advocacy sources reveal accusations of human rights violations perpetrated by Canadian mining companies and violent evictions against Guatemala's indigenous Maya population. Through a case study of Vancouver-based Skye Resources operation in El Estor, Izabel, Guatemala, we explore the concept of corporate social responsibility from various perspectives, including the Canadian government policy position, Canadian mining companies, and the effected community of El Estor in Guatemala and argue that violations will continue when enforceable accountability measures are absent. The case study on Skye Resources and the accusations of human rights violations against mining companies is based on my participation in the 2006 Geography Field School to Guatemala.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.059 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".