Communities and New Development Paths in the Sparsely Populated North
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This special issue presents a collection of research snapshots from a geographically broad and thematically diverse selection of northern peripheries. Together, they address diverse issues under the theme of ‘new development paths for communities in the sparsely populated north’ from a variety of disciplines, and employ different theoretical frameworks and research methodologies. Initial impetus for this special issue came from discussions between the special issue editors and authors during the 2015 conference of the Canadian Association of Geographers in Vancouver, British Columbia. What started off as a relatively narrow discussion of the role of tourism in stimulating new community development in the sparsely populated north, gradually broadened in scope to consider, amongst other things, more general processes of economic diversification and ‘post-staples’ development, local innovation dynamics, institutional change, and the importance of creative capital, translocal networks, social entrepreneurship, and changing population mobilities, as well as the need to support the inclusion of marginalized (e.g. gender and Indigenous) perspectives for new socio-economic development. This eventually resulted in the present volume of 14 papers, made up of conceptual contributions aimed at advancing a pan-polar discussion of the issues, and specific case studies from northern Canada (Nunavut, British Columbia, Quebec, and Newfoundland/Labrador), Iceland (Vatnajokull, Skagastrond), Norway (Finnmark), Sweden (Vasterbotten; Jamtland), and Finland (Finnish Lapland). Key Words: northern peripheries; translocal; diversification; mobilities
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".