Reflecting to the Utilization on National Inquiry as Peace Infrastructure to Address Systemic Conflict over Customary Forest: A Comparative Case Studies of Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conflict over land, forest and natural resources in the Southeast Asia is one of the biggest systemic conflicts that can be traced back to colonial times, yet still practiced to this day and become the roots of injustice for indigenous people. The studies related to the exclusion and marginalization of indigenous peoples from their lands and territories have attracted the attention of researchers. Yet not many give consideration to combine the role of human rights mechanisms with peacebuilding initiatives. NHRIs (The National Human Rights Institutions) is one of independent mechanisms that somewhat missing link and less discussed in the peacebuilding architecture. The paper aims to provide a framework in land tenure and forest conflict management using National Inquiry initiated by NHRIs in Indonesia, Malaysia, and the Philippines. In other countries, such as Australia or Canada, the National Inquiry are able to bring those suffered and other key-actors, initiating process of reconciliation, healing and even, victims reparation. The central idea of this model of peace infrastructure is its multi-sectoral approach which could engages all levels of society and connects peacebuilding tracks to form a platform for constructive relationship-building between relevant stakeholders, indigenous communities, local and national government and also private corporates. It will reflect the importance of inclusivity and how to incorporate local and grassroots actors in addition to conflict parties and other state actors within the process and structure of national inquiry. Using comparative analysis, the paper is intended to assess the utilization of national inquiry to harness a transformative approach to the conflict in the indigenous territories and create a more equitable land and forest policy. Keywords: Indigenous People, National Inquiry, Customary Land Conflict, Peace Infrastructure
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".