Structuring collaboration amongst B.C. First Nations and local governments : learning from Katzie First Nation and neighbouring local governments
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First Nations and local government communities in urban areas in British Columbia find themselves living in close proximity to each other as a result of urban growth. Local governments are becoming concerned about the impacts final treaty settlements will have on their communities. In general, they are unsure about the effects increased self-governing powers will have on their communities. In order for treaty implementation to be successful and, for First Nations and local government communities to co-exist in urban areas, it is necessary for these two parties to develop collaborative relationships. The main objectives of this research were to identify ways First Nations and local governments could collaborate on planning matters and to contribute to the literature on First Nation and local government planning relationships in BC. A framework of opportunities and obstacles to structuring collaboration among a First Nation and local government was developed by interviewing individuals from Katzie First Nation and neighbouring local governments. A discussion on the need for both parties to be motivated by a critical interest to structure collaboration is included in the framework. For the current study, the critical interest for the two parties stems from Katzie's treaty negotiations. The study found five key elements that together increase the opportunity for First Nations and local governments to structure collaboration. These are First Nation participation in the BC treaty process, face to face communication, mutual learning, First Nation participation in neighbouring community events, and informed municipal leaders on First Nation issues. The study identified the following four obstacles to collaboration: First Nations and local governments inability to negotiate at the treaty table, competing land use and development, relative government and administrative capacity, and lack of legislation requiring First Nations to consult with local governments. The framework considers issues that are specific to urban areas in BC where First Nations are negotiating treaties and how these issues affect collaboration among First Nations and local governments. The opportunities are consistent with the general principles of collaborative planning. It is concluded that the BC treaty process, in this case, acts as a catalyst in bringing these two parties together in long term dialogue and eventual collaboration.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.036 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| 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".