Towards Critical and Transformative Participatory Development in the Andes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this thesis is to explore, from an organisational standpoint, what is currently being done to improve participation and capacity development in rural projects within the Andes. The research is based in grounded theory and qualitative participatory methods. It was conducted through semi-structured interviews in Peru from November 1st, 2022, to November 30th, 2022. Two site visits were performed, including a field visit, and a workshop attendance. Results demonstrate a significant emphasis on decolonisation from international non-government organisations, with a lesser importance placed by local NGOs. Local development workers were more concerned about market protections and the over-arching extractive systemic post-colonial structure. Importantly, the researcher acknowledges his own positionality within the colonial structure and has done his best to promote the voices of the local and Indigenous populations. The study seeks to tell experiences of the local and Indigenous peoples, rather than prescribe a narrative or outside perspective.
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 | 0.096 | 0.053 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.073 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.023 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".