Creating Community: Industrial Paternalism and Town Planning in Corner Brook, Newfoundland, 1923–1955
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the early twentieth century numerous primary extractive industries constructed company towns on the resource frontiers of North America. Company directors hoped that massive capital infusion in remote areas in the form of planned towns would secure a much-needed skilled workforce and generally increase returns. The pulp and paper town of Corner Brook in western Newfoundland is a significant, but largely neglected case in point. This paper details the paternalist and utilitarian motivations of companies for single-industry community construction at this time. More importantly, however, it offers a new and critical approach to the issue of single-industry community development. Early multinational companies sought to secure a place "on the ground" through comprehensive planning and community administration. At the same time, residents of Corner Brook, though constrained by dependence on the sole industry, negotiated their own physically and socially distinct community in a variety of ways. The global-local nexus of company planning, resident response, and change introduces a complexity into the study of company towns that are generally portrayed in terms of rigid top-down company exploitation of a "captive" workforce.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".