MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2051435702 · doi:10.1108/17506201211258405

Partnerships towards NTFP development: perspectives from Pikangikum First Nation

2012· article· en· W2051435702 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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Enterprising Communities People and Places in the Global Economy · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicConservation, Biodiversity, and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPublic relationsConvention on Biological DiversityCorporationCommunity developmentOriginalityFocus groupTraditional knowledgeSociologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementQualitative researchBusinessMarketingSocial scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to provide a community perspective on partnerships with the goal of researching, designing, developing and commercializing non‐timber forest products (NTFPs) based on indigenous knowledge and resources from Pikangikum First Nation, northwestern Ontario, Canada. Design/methodology/approach Framed by the Whitefeather Forest Research Cooperative agreement, a collaborative and ethnographic research design was adopted with the Whitefeather Forest Management Corporation and the Whitefeather Forest Elders Steering Group in Pikangikum First Nation. Over the period of two years, initial research planning meetings were held with community representatives, fieldwork and interviews with community Elders and leaders were conducted, and three community workshops were held. Findings Community Elders and leaders articulated a cautious interest in developing ethical, collaborative partnerships that support the Whitefeather Forest Initiative and the community's social, cultural, economic and environmental goals. Developing NTFPs through partnerships is a procedural issue that requires giving Elders a primary role in advising and guiding partnerships at all stages of NTFP planning, research and development. Partners would be expected to build respectful and diligent partnerships that interface knowledge systems, maintain good relations, and generate mutually defined benefits. Research limitations/implications This community‐specific approach provides insight for Aboriginal groups, governments, universities, and corporations seeking to develop access and benefit sharing agreements, policies, or protocols in light of the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol. Originality/value This paper offers perspectives, principles, and community member narratives from a Canadian indigenous community, Pikangikum First Nation. These perspectives describe how this community envisions potential research, development and commercialization of NTFPs through joint and mutually beneficial partnerships.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.165
Threshold uncertainty score0.365

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.226
Teacher spread0.183 · 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