MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2408638761 · doi:10.14288/1.0165572

“All of the water that is in our reserves and that is in our territory is ours” : colonial and Indigenous water governance in unceded Indigenous territories in British Columbia

2014· article· en· W2408638761 on OpenAlexaffabout
Beatrice Rose Simms

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousColonialismCorporate governanceGeographyPolitical scienceEnvironmental protectionEcologyArchaeologyEconomicsBiologyManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With increasing legal recognition of Aboriginal rights and title, growing calls for collaborative water governance arrangements with First Nations, and approval of British Columbia’s new Water Sustainability Act (2014), shifts are unfolding in water governance in BC which have some significant implications for First Nations. First Nations across British Columbia have also clearly articulated that water and water governance are priority areas of concern. Within this context, this thesis examines the historic and present roles and experiences of First Nations in colonial water governance in British Columbia, based primarily on a case study conducted with the Lower Similkameen Indian Band. In Chapter 2, I examine the historical formation of reserves and the colonial water allocation system, exploring how the demarcation of reserve boundaries and water licenses established some fundamental barriers for First Nations in water access and governance that persist today. Chapter 3 provides an overview of concerns about colonial water governance that were identified by Lower Similkameen Indian Band interviewees and others, followed by a critical discussion of how a collaborative watershed planning model could address, or further entrench, existing governance challenges. This thesis provides a timely and relevant commentary on the contested realities of First Nations’ engagement in colonial water governance in the province. Insights suggest that while there is growing recognition that First Nations have a legitimate place at the center of water governance in British Columbia, the collaborative watershed planning approach adopted in the Water Sustainability Act falls well short of adopting the necessary steps towards full Indigenous water governance or water co-governance. Existing colonial water governance challenges and failures are not likely to be addressed by a collaborative watershed planning approach. Overall, this thesis suggests that the transition to more effective and just water governance in British Columbia includes observation of Aboriginal rights and title, commitment to relationship and trust building, and capacity development for colonial and First Nations governments.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0220.015
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.204 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)→Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights→French-language works237,207→