Implementing First Nations Self-Government in Yukon: Lessons for Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: The experience of implementing self-government in the Yukon offers important insights into the future of self-government nationally. Yukon First Nations have created institutions that reflect their traditional values, that achieve creditable levels of accountability and that have limited their responsibilities to what their staff resources can handle. Yukon First Nations have assumed relatively few jurisdictional responsibilities because they reject the financial terms presented by the federal and territorial governments. This pattern is likely to weaken inherence-based governments as they appear elsewhere in Canada. This prospect raises the question of how First Nations should divide their energy and resources between pursuing inherence and strengthening the capacity of their existing institutions. Résumé.La mise en oeuvre d'un gouvernement autonome au Yukon offre d'importants aperçus sur l'avenir de l'autonomie sur le plan national. Les autochtones du Yukon ont créé des institutions qui reflètent leurs valeurs traditionnelles, atteignent des niveaux estimables de responsabilité et ont limité leurs engagements en fonction de leurs ressources en personnel. Les autochtones du Yukon ont assumé relativement peu de responsabilités juridictionnelles parce qu'ils rejettent les conditions financières présentées par le gouvernement fédéral et le gouvernement territorial. Ce dilemme va vraisemblablement affaiblir les gouvernements inhérents qui verront le jour ailleurs au Canada. La question se pose dès lors de savoir comment les autochtones devraient diviser leur énergie et leurs ressources entre la poursuite de l'inhérence et le renforcement de la capacité de leurs institutions existantes.
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 | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".