When knowledges meet: Management and co-management of a declining salmon run in Subarctic Canada
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Dawson city is a small community located at the Northeast of Canada, just next to the Alaskan border. The city is most famous for the Klondike Gold rush that happened in 1896, however, indigenous people (in Canada called First Nations) have resided in the area for 10-15000 years. From the 1840s, non-First Nation people have arrived in Dawson, as miners, missionaries, adventurers, tourists and long-stay immigrants. Today, 2000 people live in Dawson, out of where 345 people are of First Nation origin, called the Tr ondëk Hwëch in. Next to Dawson flows the Yukon River. Every summer, two salmon species swim from the Bering Sea in Alaska to Dawson to spawn in the same creek they were once hatched. Harvesting salmon has been important to the Tr ondëk Hwëch in since the beginning of time. It is still of great importance to the Tr ondëk Hwëch in today, as food and as part of their culture and identity. The non-First Nation people in Dawson have since the 1840s engaged in the salmon fishery in different ways: as fishers, as consumers or as fish plant employees. Out of the two runs, the favoured species for human consumption has been the one species, Chinook salmon. The other, Chum salmon, has mostly been fished to feed dogs. From the 1990s, the Chinook salmon run started to decline. In 2013, the run was expected to reach an all time low. The Chinook fishery was restricted, allowing only people of First Nation origin to fish for Chinook salmon. In Dawson, views about salmon and salmon management differ whether a person belongs to the First Nation population, the non-First Nation population or is employed in the state bureaucracy. This thesis aim to investigate the different types of knowledges about salmon, asking the questions: What is a salmon? What is the proper relationship between humans and salmon? How should salmon be managed? The different knowledges have disparate relations to the processes of management and co-management of the Chinook salmon. The second half of the thesis aim to explore the meetings between the knowledges that occurred when people engaged in management and co-management. These meetings reveal structures of discursive power, as described by Michel Foucault (1980) and Eric Wolf (1989). Secondly, these meetings are examples of non-meetings, concerning the people who did not fit into co-management schemes and were not invited into the discussions and meetings regarding the management of Chinook salmon.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,011 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,006 | 0,001 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».