Caring for the land : Nemaska Cree strategies of resistance to the EM-1-A and Rupert Diversion Project in eastern James Bay, northern Quebec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The social and environmental impacts of large-scale industrial development have had direct and extensive impacts on the Cree communities of eastern James Bay, northern Quebec. The signing of the 'New Relationship Agreement' between the Quebec Crees and Quebec Government (2002) formalized measures for local participation in overseeing the management of natural resources and development projects in the region. This initiative purports to provide Crees with a voice in decisions relating to projects that affect their lives and the lands they occupy. In return, the New Agreement paved the way for the development of the EM-1-A & Rupert Diversion Project and ensured the support of the regional Cree leadership. This study presents the perspectives of the local Cree community of Nemaska on the potential impacts of the EM-1-A & Rupert Diversion Project and examines various political strategies that they have drawn upon to defend their land against the proposed hydroelectric expansion. My findings show that despite formidable obstacles, Nemaska Crees have demonstrated a remarkable capacity to engage a range of political strategies in an effort to voice their opposition to the EM-1-A/Rupert diversion project. Although construction of the river diversion project is now underway, and 'the battle to save the Rupert River' has been lost, this thesis affirms the role and significance of individuals and organizations operating at the local level in articulating and framing the implications of the ecological crises imposed by large-scale industrial development on the 'local'
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".