Enduring polar explorers’ Arctic imaginaries and the promotion of neoliberalism and colonialism in modern Greenland
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ideas promulgated by nineteenth century and twentieth century Arctic explorers have critical resonance today, serving to prop up neoliberal agendas in the Arctic, including Greenland. The identification of themes in the accounts of Arctic explorers allows for a fuller understanding of their Arctic imaginaries; coupling this exercise with an examination of contemporary discourse on natural resource exploitation in the Arctic makes clear the persistence of these imaginaries. This paper uses texts by Greenland explorers Isaac Ira Hayes, Robert Peary, Josephine Diebitsch Peary, Knud Rasmussen and Robert Bartlett followed by reports produced by EU Polar Net and the Brookings Institution to demonstrate the maintenance and promotion of Arctic imaginaries. Among the most prominent themes are the Arctic Greenland as an empty space, which invites and reinforces the legitimacy of neoliberal colonial activities like natural resource exploitation, and the primitiveness, near invisibility and inconsequentiality of Indigenous peoples, including Greenlandic Inuit. Enduring Arctic imaginaries lie at the root of challenges facing Greenland, as an Arctic country, in its ongoing struggle for increased self-determination.
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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".