First Nations’ involvement in forest governance in Québec: The place for distinct consultation processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aboriginal peoples in Canada present a special case of citizen involvement in forest governance, with rights and statusthat go beyond those of other stakeholders and individuals. Increasingly, participation processes aimed specifically atAboriginal representatives are being used to encourage their involvement in forest management. This article asks whatwould be the characteristics of a distinct process that could respond to Aboriginal rights, needs and expectations. We doso by combining the results of a broad Québec-wide study with those from a case study of forestry participation in a singlecommunity. A total of 68 consultation processes are analyzed. These experiences enable the identification of severalcharacteristics of consultation processes used for First Nations. We also note that distinct consultations typically reflectthe same practices that are used more generally for public participation in forestry, raising the question of whether or notthese consultations truly respond to Aboriginal rights, needs and expectations in Québec.Key words: Aboriginal peoples, Aboriginal forestry, forest management, public participation mechanisms, duty to consult,Canada
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".