Resource Dependence and Community Well‐Being in Rural Canada*
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The well‐being of residents of resource dependent communities is a question of traditional interest to rural sociologists. The label “resource dependent” obscures how this relationship may vary between particular resource industries, regions, or indicators of well‐being. Few analyses have compared the relationship between well‐being and resource dependence across different industries, nor tested competing theories about the relationship between resource dependence and well‐being. Our paper presents an overview of the relationship between resource dependence—agriculture, fisheries, mining, energy, forestry—and human well‐being in Canada. Analysis of 1996 Statistics Canada data revealed a great deal of variation in the effect of “resource” dependence on indicators of well‐being (e.g., human capital, unemployment, income): some industries exhibit fairly positive outcomes (e.g., agriculture), others more negative outcomes (e.g., fishing). Consistent with analyses conducted in the United States, these relationships vary by region, suggesting the need for models that incorporate the particulars of place and industry.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it