The Invisible Movement: The Response of the Newfoundland Environmental Movement to the Offshore Oil Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this research is to explain how the environmental movement in Newfoundland has responded to the offshore oil industry in this province. It is based on the observation that while environmental groups in other parts of the country have undertaken issues regarding the environmental impacts of the offshore oil industry, groups in Newfoundland, for the most part, have not. In order to explore what factors have contributed to such a response, or lack of response, this research used theories of frames, political opportunities, and resource mobilization. Thirty-seven semi-structured interviews were conducted with members of environmental groups, government, industry, and the private sector, as well as unaffiliated individuals. These interviews provided information about the key factors that contributed to or hindered action against the offshore oil industry. The main findings suggest that resources, opportunities, and frames all played a part in whether action took place and if so, in what form. Both resources and opportunities were important for groups to act, as were their perceptions about these resources and opportunities, i.e. the likelihood that using them would lead to change.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".