MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1490691121

Beyond Consultation: First Nations and the Governance of Shale Gas in British Columbia

2013· dissertation· en· W1490691121 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kathryn H. Garvie

Bibliographic record

VenuePhDT · 2013
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShale gasCorporate governanceOil shalePolitical sciencePublic administrationPetroleum engineeringGeologyManagementEconomicsPaleontology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the province of British Columbia seeks to rapidly develop an extensive natural gas industry, it faces a number of challenges. One of these is that of ensuring that development does not disproportionately impact some of the province’s most marginalized communities: the First Nations on whose land extraction will take place. This is particularly crucial given that environmental problems are often caused by unjust and inequitable social conditions that must be rectified before sustainable development can be advanced. This research investigates how the BC Oil and Gas Commission’s consultation process addresses, and could be improved to better address Treaty 8 First Nations’ concerns regarding shale gas development within their traditional territories. Interviews were conducted with four Treaty 8 First Nations, the Treaty 8 Tribal Association, and provincial government and industry staff. Additionally, participant observation was conducted with the Fort Nelson First Nation Lands and Resources Department. Findings indicate that like many other resource consultation processes in British Columbia, the oil and gas consultation process is unable to meaningfully address First Nations’ concerns and values due to fundamental procedural problems, including the permit-by-permit approach and the exclusion of First Nations from the point of decision-making. Considering the government’s failure to regulate the shale gas industry in a way that protects ecological, social and cultural resilience, we argue that new governance mechanisms are needed that reallocate authority to First Nations and incorporate proposals for early engagement, long-term planning and cumulative impact assessment and monitoring. Additionally, considering the exceptional power differential between government, industry and First Nations, we argue that challenging industry’s social license to operate is an important strategy for First Nations working to gain greater influence over development within their territories, and ensure a more sustainable shale gas industry.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.468

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.006
Scholarly communication0.0070.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.296 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venuePhDTSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207