An exploratory study of underdevelopment and resource dependency in one northern hinterland community
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on communities in Canada has generally-utilized a functional or systems approach. The metropolis-hinterland explanation of dependency is presented here as a way of arguing for the adoption of an alternative conflict or structure approach to the study of resource-dependent communities. Economic dependency largely determines the way in which hinterland citizens behave both collectively and individually. The basic argument put forth in this study is that the dependent status of the northern B.C. community of Terrace significantly determines the realities of power in hinterland communities, including the absence of collective responses to common problems and the patterns of individual accommodation to social conflict. In the resource community, dependency is coupled with transiency, uncertainty about the future and a rapacious economy. The system of stratification is rigid and closed; ethnic differentiation is persistent, employment opportunities for women and youth are limited, and institutions dictate much of community life as citizens are isolated from other alternatives. Terrace is characterized by a high degree of privatization which, combined with restricted social interaction, precludes the development of a strong sense of community and suppresses overt social conflict. This study examines the exercise and maintenance of local power, the effects of dependency, the powerlessness of some groups as measured by their accommodative responses and lack of collective action, and the consequent effects of social disorganization within the community. Documentation of life in Terrace relies upon demographic and survey data, complemented by interviews which elicit the attitudes and beliefs of a cross-section of community residents.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".