Resource development and aboriginal culture in the Canadian north
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper examines the relationship between resource development and aboriginal community and cultural impacts in Canada's north from the 1970s to the present. Based on a review of published literature, it is contended that northern centred scholarship can be conceptualised in two phases. These are firstly the community impacts phase (1970 to mid-1990s), a phase guided largely by a cultural politics of assimilation, a sociology of disturbance, and an anthropology of acculturation; and secondly the community continuity phase (mid-1990s to present), a phase underpinned by political empowerment, participatory social impact assessment, and the influence of cultural ecology. Due to these shifting political dynamics and research frameworks, and a lack of longitudinal research in the north over the last four decades, it is concluded that the nature of the relationship between resource development and aboriginal culture remains elusive and subject to wide ranging interpretation. Analysis shows that cultural impacts from resource development are dependent on the scale of development and spatial disturbance. It also shows growing political power in the north, a greater focus on community-based research, and renewed discussion of cultural continuity and how it is defined and assessed over time.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".