Arctic development and historical analysis: the use of historical methodology in addressing current issues in the Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To demonstrate the applicability of historical methodology to current issues in the Canadian Arctic. STUDY DESIGN: This is a literature-based analytical historical study, which draws on material from database searches of MEDLINE, Anthropology Plus, POLARInfo, the Arctic Blue Books and Historical Abstracts. Material was also obtained from physical searches of the University of Alberta Libraries and Library and Archives Canada collections, as well as from field research in the records of the Inuulitsivik Maternities. METHODS: The historical technique of tracing epistemological change over time, pioneered by Michel Foucault and further developed by Ian Hacking, was applied to the history of Canadian authority in the Arctic. This was linked with epistemological changes occurring throughout Western/Southern culture in this period. The applicability of this historical analysis for current issues in the region was then evaluated. RESULTS: An epistemological shift in Western society has moved authority from traditional human actors in government, medicine and, increasingly, science to statistics, which is seen as both impartial and accurate. Human authorities now routinely appeal to statistical authority to validate policy decisions. This change is as apparent in the Arctic as elsewhere, but it has also opened a space for Inuit practices, rooted in traditional Inuit epistemology, to reassert themselves, provided they can satisfy demands for statistical validity. CONCLUSIONS: Historical analysis provides a means to identify the spaces which epistemological change and historical contingency have opened in which social and cultural change can occur.
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 | 0.064 | 0.066 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.019 | 0.024 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".