Traditional Knowledge and Water Governance: The ethic of responsibility
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
This paper is based on traditional knowledge policy research undertaken over the last 15 years with First Nations in Ontario. First Nations traditional knowledge-based responses to the water crisis evoke an alternative narrative to the dominant discourse. Canadian governments are focused primarily on scientific and technological approaches to resolving water quality issues. In contrast, First Nations are concerned mostly with the recognition of Aboriginal and treaty rights in relation to water. Application of such rights, as expressed by Elders and other traditional knowledge holders, leads to a much more holistic approach to water governance, one that involves fulfilling inherent responsibilities to ensuring water is protected. An overview of key elements of traditional knowledge as they relate to water governance and protection is provided. These are contrasted with highlights of Canadian government responses to water quality concerns across Canada. In order for progress to be made in the future, a nation-to-nation approach between Canadian governments and First Nations is needed.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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