MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115621546 · doi:10.1177/0160449x10392527

Beyond the Blue and Green: The Need to Consider Aboriginal Peoples’ Relationships to Resource Development in Labor-Environment Campaigns

2010· article· en· W2115621546 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

VenueLabor Studies Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousResource (disambiguation)BayEnvironmental justiceEconomic JusticePolitical scienceSocial justiceEconomic growthGeographySociologyEnvironmental planningPolitical economyEcologyEconomicsLawArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, I argue that labor researchers in North America need to engage more thoroughly with Indigenous studies if they hope to advance social and environmental justice. First, I suggest that researchers approach Aboriginal peoples’ relationships to the environment by supporting Aboriginal rights to lands and resources. Second, and related to this point, I raise the issue of the need for Aboriginal-controlled development in northern Aboriginal communities. Finally, I draw on a case study on Inuit and union participation in the creation of the Vale Inco, Voisey’s Bay nickel mine in Labrador to discuss how the increasing prevalence of corporate-Aboriginal alliances is creating important challenges to union engagement that need to be addressed.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.711
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.231 · 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