The Failure of Cultural Recognition for the Urban Transition of Aboriginal Peoples in Canada and Travellers in the Republic of Ireland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
To what extent has the failure of cultural recognition contributed to the marginalization of Aboriginal peoples in Canada and Travellers in the Republic of Ireland? The migration of both groups to urban centres coupled with the absence of choices to pursue traditional livelihoods has contributed to lifestyles that reflect despair. Along with the stress of urban transition is discrimination toward these groups by mainstream society (Cook and Belanger 2006; Silver 2006; Lawrence and Dua 2005; Helleiner 2003). Where Aboriginal peoples lack connection with their traditional languages and communities (Proulx 2003; Peters 2002), Irish Travellers are prevented from a life of nomadism (Norris and Winston 2005; Hoare 2005). In this paper I wish to focus on the impact of cultural recognition in the policy process for programs and services for both groups. Recognition is crucial for cultural survival because it is the dialogue, or the failure of dialogue, within and between cultures that may potentially marginalize them. Another policy consideration is the role of the third sector in advocacy and service delivery for both groups. My argument is that the failure of cultural recognition contributes to the marginalization of Aboriginal peoples in urban centres in
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".