Paddling the Biigtig: Mino biimadisiwin practiced through canoeing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The land is critically important for the health of Indigenous peoples, as it is the place where Indigenous Knowledge originates to form strong and healthy relationships. In the wake of unprecedented processes of environmental dispossession, Indigenous communities around the world are revitalizing the land-based cultural practices and knowledge systems that have kept them strong and healthy. For the first time in a century, Biigtigong Nishnaabeg canoed the length of the Biigtig Ziibii (Pic River). With a greater purpose of reclaiming places (e.g., mountains, rivers, portages) along the route in Anishinabemoen (the Ojibway language) and restoring community history of the river and its meanings, this canoe journey was also developed to restore land-based learning about healthy relationships and mino bimadisiwin, or "the good life". Four adults and five youth participated in this journey. Framed theoretically by the concept of environmental repossession, this paper examined participants' perceptions (n = 9) of the canoe journey, with emphasis placed on the ways in which it fostered health and well-being. Specifically, this canoe trip supported spaces for learning and practice of Indigenous Knowledge, nurturing of social relationships and, stronger connections to the land. Participants defined the canoe journey as an important space for sharing intergenerational and ancestral understandings of Indigenous Knowledge, and for broadening understandings of the land as part of the community's history, culture and well-being. As other communities search for ways to both assert their Indigenous rights and identity, this case provides an important example to build from.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".