MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2797866275 · doi:10.1525/cse.2017.000653

Learning the Language of the River: Understanding Indigenous Water Governance with<i>O-Pipon-Na-Piwin</i>Cree Nation, Northern Manitoba, Canada

2018· article· en· W2797866275 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Asfia Gulrukh Kamal, Joseph Dipple, Steve Ducharme, Leslie Dysart

Bibliographic record

VenueCase Studies in the Environment · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIndigenousMainstreamLivelihoodCorporate governancePolitical scienceResource (disambiguation)DeclarationIndigenous rightsTraditional knowledgeEnvironmental ethicsEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental planningSociologyGeographyEconomic growthLawPoliticsAgricultureManagementEcologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Hydroelectric “development” in Canada has been criticized for the lack of meaningful consideration of community perspectives. This article shares the case of the O-Pipon-Na-Piwin Cree Nation (OPCN) in northern Manitoba, Canada, and the impact of mainstream water resource management strategies over their culture and livelihood. Through consideration of Kistihtamahwin, OPCN’s concept of water governance, as well as the promises made in the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP), this article argues that the lack of meaningful consultation and engagement with local resource users as well as the concept of Kistihtamahwin has led to the destruction of a successful fishery, which resulted in severe socioeconomic loss, environmental degradation, and cultural loss in the community. We found that for meaningful application of UNDRIP in Indigenous water governance, local cultural strategies and traditional knowledge are essential.

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)0.003
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 score0.070
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0270.028
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.227 · 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCase Studies in the EnvironmentSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207