Povos Indígenas, Grandes Projetos Hidrelétricos e Indigenismo Empresarial no Brasil e no Canadá
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work starts from the comparison of the Avá-Canoeiro and Cree cases in the face of the large hydroelectric projects installed in their territories to examine the overlapping processes of indigeneity and environmental regimes as beacons of their self-determination and autonomy rights. These cases are illustrative of possible forms of resistance by indigenous peoples against mega-hydraulic power generation projects. It starts from these concrete cases, understood as historical situations configured by this developmentalist pattern of power, to examine the hypothesis that indigenous peoples play, from the defense of their territorial rights, a central, albeit contradictory, role in the process of expanded reproduction of capital. From a perspective of environmental preservation and recognition of rights, technically and scientifically based, it is argued that indigenous peoples end up being subordinated to the discourses, formulas, agreements and negotiations of capitalist entrepreneurs, who directly subordinate their demands and rights to reproduction of capital, where the social suffering to which they are subject is silenced. Through the reciprocal study of the cases located in Brazil and Canada, similar aspects will be outlined that will allow characterizing the cases as “social dramas of development” that structure the conflict of these situations and require intercultural forms of interpretation for their best equation. In this sense, this work also aims to examine the conditions of possibility of activating principles of discursive ethics and interethnic dialogue in interethnic contexts affected by major works and development projects.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".