Offshore Oil, Environmental Movements, and the Oil‐Tourism Interface: The Old Harry Conflict on Canada's East Coast
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Offshore oil development and nature‐based tourism offer alternative ways of living with and making use of coastal environments. We analyze a recent controversy over offshore oil extraction in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, in eastern Canada, and identify key points of alignment between environmentalism and the tourism industry that structure resistance to oil development. Our results are based on interviews with tourism operators, government, environmental groups, and recreational organizations, as well as an analysis of key Web sites and Web 2.0 content. Four discourses are used to challenge the normal separation of offshore oil and tourism development in Atlantic Canada: wilderness and wildlife; ecological risks of oil disaster; protecting existing social–ecological networks; and contesting political jurisdiction. Our findings show that the ecological and social value of the Gulf of St. Lawrence is used to justify opposition to oil development in the region. However, the project‐specific nature of this opposition neglects larger questions of social–environmental sustainability in an oil‐dependent political ecology.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it