‘Set Adrift’: Fatalism as Organizational Culture at Canadian Seaports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This paper takes an anthropological approach to understanding the governance of seaport security in Canada; it uses cultural theory and the concepts of regulation and integration as key determinants in understanding how organizations respond to risk. This paper draws on data from 29 semi-structured interviews with transportation specialists, including owners, operators, managers and regulators. Nine of the interview subjects came from seaports, in particular. The interviews occurred between 2011 and 2013. We argue that Canadian seaports exist in an area of confusing multi-level governance; they are immovable, are expected to be competitive and serve a number of (at times competing) public and private sector interests. These institutional arrangements have resulted in a security environment that is heavily regulated, but the community itself is not well integrated. Interview subjects raise concerns about the ports’ ability to respond to security threats. The paper then uses cultural theory to examine alternative governance arrangements enhancing, for example, community, competition or regulation. While most options to improve security will likely reduce the competitiveness of the seaports, it would help to instill more confidence among port staff and enhance organizational learning.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".