The Canadian Environmental Assessment Act, 2012 and Associated Policy: Implications for Aboriginal Peoples
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite Canada’s positive reputation in international circles regarding environmental protection, there are recent signs that this is no longer warranted. Recent changes to the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) clearly present governmental intentions to focus efforts on stimulating economic growth through more rapid resource exploitation at the expense of the environment. Moreover, when assessing the impact of CEAA 2012 on Aboriginal people, one must look beyond the Act itself and take into account other pieces of policy to see the true effects because there are a number of other governmental initiatives that further weaken Aboriginal peoples’ capacity to participate in the resource development review process for undertakings that affect their traditional lands. The result is the silencing of the people who are most affected by resource development.
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 | 0.013 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".