Resource Extraction: The Enduring Legacy of Interference through the Papal Bulls
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With aggressive tactics by companies with government support to extract resources and the continued effort to pass Bill C-262,2 an act which calls on Indigenous people and the Government of Canada to ensure the laws of Canada harmonize with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP),it is necessary to delve deeper into what underlies the resource extractive industry and the emergence of this legislation. This article begins with a brief discussion of the UNDRIP and the refusal of Canada to participate in the World Conference on Indigenous Peoples. Delving deeper brings forward three particular papal bulls or proclamations that encouraged interference—the disruption of relationships—and gave expression to the Doctrine of Discovery and colonization. This interference continues today in the vivid example of the resource extractive industries. Because the papal bulls are the structural foundation for the Doctrine and colonization, reconciliation necessitates rescinding those bulls. Passing Bill C-262 re-establishes the relationship between Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples; one characterized by respect, trust, equity and collaboration.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".