Contested Colonialism: The Rise of Settler Politics in Yukon and the Northwest Territories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite forty years of institutional innovation across Northern Canada â including the creation of Indigenous governments and Nunavut â why do the governments of Yukon and the Northwest Territories (NWT) so closely conform to the established norms of Canadian parliamentary and bureaucratic governance? In this study, I argue that these governments reflect the political preferences of non-Indigenous settlers, and that these preferences were embedded in the design of territorial institutions during their formation in the 1960s and 1970s. The institutional legacy of this period continues to structure political and economic dynamics in the territories today. To make this argument, I develop the theoretical concept of contested colonialism, which explains the distinct position of non-Indigenous peoples in Northern society as actors who simultaneously bring colonialism to the North, while also contesting elements of that same colonial order. It is marked by the emergence of a stable settler society, the structural alignment of settler interests with those of colonial federal administrators, and the capacity of settlers to take advantage of political opportunities to further their own interests. Using interpretivist and qualitative methods, including extensive archival research, I trace the rise of settler politics through the prism of liberal autonomy movements and the development of responsible government in both territories. Demographic, geographic, and economic factors account for differences in the effectiveness of settler movements across Yukon and the NWT.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".