MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800936742 · doi:10.7939/r3wx4r

The Politics of Development in Nunavut: Land Claims, Arctic Urbanization, and Geopolitics

2013· article· en· W2800936742 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Barret Weber

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity of Alberta Library · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicArctic and Russian Policy Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsUrbanizationPoliticsArcticThe arcticPolitical scienceGeographyEconomic growthEconomicsGeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis surveys the development of Nunavut as not only a governmental and institutional entity but as a territory that is a political and social space both in the tradition of the Territories of the Canadian State and of Westphalian territorial government generally. It relies on Inuit everyday life, knowledge and values in the Eastern and Central Canadian Arctic. Drawing on first hand ethnographic fieldwork conducted primarily in Iqaluit, Nunavut, Canada, from 2008–2011; interviews with key informants; archival research, and participant observation in local, national and international governmental forums; Iqaluit, capital of Nunavut, is presented as a major case study. Iqaluit carries important lessons for evaluating processes of Arctic urbanization, the centralization and formation of communities and it has been challenged as a meaningful site for Inuit dwelling, rather than purely a governmental place. The poor image of Iqaluit is also related to the differential experience of migrants from other parts of the Arctic and local families who are successful as established insiders. In addition, minor case studies of the human dimensions of climate change and the debate on the European Union seal ban are presented. Attitudes towards social science research illustrate disagreements and conflict between “northern” publics and Canadian and international “southern” values.

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)0.002
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.323

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.189 · 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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity of Alberta LibrarySame topicArctic and Russian Policy StudiesFrench-language works237,207