Critical elements for local Indigenous water security in Canada: a narrative review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous communities in Canada are over-represented with respect to poor water quality and water advisories. To date, approaches to solve this water crisis have been founded in the Western Science (WS) context with little to no consultation or dialogue with those communities most impacted, and without regard for culture. A literature review was undertaken to: (i) document Indigenous Knowledge (IK), and perspectives regarding water and (ii) to identify current local water security tools utilized by Indigenous communities. The aim is to provide sound evidence regarding the value of ownership and leadership by Indigenous communities in the context of current and appropriate resources available to (re)claim these roles. Solutions must remain consistent with, and founded upon, traditional Indigenous worldviews and cultural values to ensure sustainable water security. Literature reviewed from the past ten years revealed one overarching creation theme with three water-specific themes in Indigenous communities; namely, water from natural sources, water as a life-giving entity, and water and gender. Ultimately, there needs to be a new framing of local water security with the development of tools which engage IK and WS in order to assess local water security and appropriately inform interventions, policies, regulations and legislation.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".