MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W3127681241

Honouring water: remediating an anthropocentric worldview

2020· dissertation· en· W3127681241 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff
Celina Rios-Nadeau

Notice bibliographique

RevueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University) · 2020
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueWater Governance and Infrastructure
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésAnthropocentrismEnvironmental ethicsGeographyEcologySociologyPhilosophyBiology
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Lack of Potable Water in First Nations communities is often portrayed negatively
\nin the media. Framed as a Water crisis, the responsibility and failure to provide safe
\nWater for communities is solely placed on the federal government of Canada. While
\ncolonization and enforcing these mindsets play a large part in these issues, all people are
\naccountable for what is happening to the Water. This exploration of Water in First Nations
\ncommunities considers two worldviews: Anishnawbek and Western perspectives. Western
\nunderstandings of Water include implications of governance, policy, and set infrastructure
\nwithin First Nations communities that measure its success based on funding models and
\nmeet regulated standards. Through ending Water advisories in communities, a surface
\nunderstanding of addressing Water protection is framed through human well-being, and
\nhow to prevent further damage to human health. This perspective is very problematic when
\nconsidering Anishnawbek ways of being, that value relationships and interconnections
\nwith all living beings. Wateris life, it is a living entity, and has a spirit that must be respected
\nand honoured. Views of Water need to be reframed through an understanding of how we can
\nrespect the Water that brings us life and sustains us. We must reclaim the relationship
\nwith Water, by reconnecting community involvement in Water processes and to Water
\nitself. As a response to the current society, Indigenous women are reasserting their
\nrole as the voice that speaks for the Water. Through leaders such as Water Walkers,
\nthere is an awareness brought to seemingly transparent issues of Water pollution and
\nneglect, by walking around bodies of Water such as the Great Lakes. Water Walks are
\nacts of ceremony themselves, honouring Water through prayer, song, and offerings of
\ntobacco at every waterway that is passed, showing thanks and respect for the Water. In order to value Anishnawbek ways of being and living, it is imperative to reassess
\nexisting political hierarchy in water governance and establish inclusive processes
\nencompassing community voice, and the affected ecological factors of the land that is
\nbeing impacted through substantial infrastructure intervention. To address the problem
\nof Water, Water and wastewater infrastructure as they are understood presently, add
\nlarge amounts of chemicals to the Water, which often results in dead Water without spirit,
\nwhile undervaluing Anishnawbek perspectives and community involvement. Through
\nan investigation of Water practices in other cultures, and case studies that address Water through phytoremediation systems, an integration of Anishnawbek concepts,
\nmeanings, and teachings can be reflected upon in a new understanding of the value of
\nWater through architecture systems and design. In collaboration with the Atikameksheng
\nAnishnawbek First Nation community, located near Sudbury, Ontario, the history of
\nWater and community will be transcribed through story. Engaging with community
\nElders, Knowledge Carriers, and other public figures will help in understanding the
\nstrong connections with Water prior to Water facilities, as well as mapping a small part
\nof the land. Through a proposed framework that considers both worldviews, a new
\nunderstanding of Water and architecture can begin to amend the perceptions and current
\nrealities of Water purification in First Nations communities and restore relations to Water.

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 distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesMéta-épidémiologie (sens strict), Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Qualitatif · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,857
Score d'incertitude au seuil1,000

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0010,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,001
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0010,000

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.

Tête enseignante Opus0,010
Tête enseignante GPT0,231
Écart entre enseignants0,221 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_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 découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeQualitatif
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2020
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueLu Zone Ul (Laurentian University)Même sujetWater Governance and InfrastructureTravaux en français237 207