MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046741118 · doi:10.1080/01442872.2013.822703

From blank spaces to flows of life: transforming community engagement in environmental decision-making and its implications for localism

2013· article· en· W2046741118 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLocalismFraming (construction)IndigenousCommunity cohesionSociologyIndigenous rightsPublic relationsEnvironmental ethicsPublic administrationPolitical sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Localism advocates the participation of ‘local’ groups in governmental decision-making processes. While making policy more context/place specific is a progressive goal, this paper suggests that the processes through which this occurs, and underlying conceptual approaches to scale and place, require a careful analysis. Although often side-lined, Indigenous experiences of localism are key to seeing these issues as critical responses to place and politics, rather than relegating them to an ‘Aboriginal’-specific issue. This paper outlines two practical implementations of Aboriginal inclusion in environmental decision-making, in Canada and Australia. These case studies demonstrate both the failings of current framings of localism and ‘environment’ in policy-making and the inadequate responses of governments to the complexities of place making. These challenges are illustrative and symptomatic of wider issues about how environmental policy and place are currently envisaged. This paper suggests a new methodological framing of these issues that positions the current framing as one view among many, offers a non-relativist frame of communication for moving beyond inclusion and outlines the implications of this reframing for localism.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.336
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.128
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.318 · 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