Re(con)figuring Alliances: Place Membership, Environmental Justice, and the Remaking of Indigenous-Environmentalist Relationships in Canada's Boreal Forest
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Critical observers of the international environmental movement have found that indigenous-environmentalist alliances have often been predicated upon reproductions of an asymmetrical political status quo, thereby perpetuating indigenous peoples' systemic disadvantages and predestining promising partnerships for eventual disintegration. Spotlighting the relationship between Grassy Narrows First Nation and Rainforest Action Network, this article describes how indigenous-environmentalist alliances are being constructively re(con)figured in the context of recent anti-clearcutting activism in northwestern Ontario. An analysis of the positive interpersonal relationships cited by participants as key to the coalition's success reveals the significance of (1) a social setting conducive to imagining membership in a diverse community united by an emplaced interest in boreal forest protection and (2) a transformed conceptual framework that redefines the environment to include human activities and concerns. I argue that this dynamic socio-discursive context not only facilitated the development of a strong alliance and an effective conservation campaign, but may also ultimately empower indigenous communities to participate in environmental protection on terms that are closer to their own. When environmentalists refigure the categories that guide their relationships to the places they seek to protect, they also reconfigure the power structures underpinning their alliances with the indigenous groups who call those places home.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".