MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2267628147 · doi:10.1111/ruso.12094

Blurring the Boundaries of Environmentalism: The Role of Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society as a Boundary Organization in Northern Conservation Planning

2016· article· en· W2267628147 on OpenAlex
Ken J. Caine

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

VenueRural Sociology · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWildernessBoundary-workNatural resourceEnvironmentalismGovernment (linguistics)Wilderness areaPoliticsBoundary (topology)SociologyResource (disambiguation)Corporate governancePolitical sciencePublic relationsEnvironmental resource managementPublic administrationEconomic growthEnvironmental planningManagementGeographySocial scienceEcologyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Boundary organizations facilitate the transfer of practical knowledge between scientific and political realms. In the Northwest Territories of Canada the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society (CPAWS), an environmental nongovernmental organization (ENGO), increasingly undertakes boundary work as a partner or leading organization in the development of novel arrangements in natural resource management. Drawing on ethnographic research conducted over three years’ participation in working groups for Great Bear Lake watershed management planning and the protection of an Aboriginal cultural landscape, I examine how CPAWS served an atypical ENGO function as a boundary organization. Historically ENGOs in Canada have taken a strong preservationist and anti‐industrial development stance to environmental governance issues. CPAWS, in these contemporary cases, was sensitive to multiple interests and values and assisted in both community and government projects by taking a proactive and participatory role, recognizing the need for community economic development including resource‐extractive industries. At the same time, however, CPAWS strategically promoted its status in other national conservation projects. An indirect outcome is increased perceived efficacy and influence of the boundary organization in larger forums and contexts. CPAWS effectively transformed its historically perceived preservationist, litigious, and watchdog stance to a position as active, positive, and even powerful organizational actor in conservation and development in Canada.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.361
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.264 · 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