Introduction: Place-Based Sustainability Research in the Provincial North
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First published advance online January 27, 2020As one of the most sparsely populated countries in the world, Canada depends on widely dispersed rural and northern settlements to support the use and development of the country’s agricultural and natural resources that are at the heart of Canadian livelihoods and the economy (Hallstrom, Beckie, Hvenegaard, & Mündel, 2016; Markey, Breen, Gibson, Mealy, & Ryser, 2015; Hodge, Hall, & Robinson, 2017). The sustainability of these regional communities depends on a complex network of organizations dedicated to promoting the high standard of living for which Canada is recognized around the world (Hodge et al., 2017; Hall, Vodden, & Greenwood, 2016; Halseth & Ryser, 2016; Schiff, 2014). For example, a 2013 inventory of regional development organizations in Newfoundland and Labrador identified more than 1,000 organizations involved in development at the regional scale in that province (Vodden, Hall, & Freshwater, 2014). The future challenges of Canada’s regional centres are among the country’s key future challenges. To consider these issues, we hosted the workshop “Regional centres and the sustainability of Canada’s rural and northern landscapes” in May 2018 at Lakehead University (supported by funding from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada). Our aim was to explore the role of regional centres in Canada’s development as a nation and the role that they will play into the future. The workshop brought together researchers from regional centres across the country to focus on key challenges across the landscape of Canada’s Provincial Norths. Ken Coates, Canada Research Chair in Regional Innovation at the Johnson-Shoyama Graduate School of Public Policy at the University of Saskatchewan delivered a keynote presentation on regional policy in Canada. He discussed ways that regional centres can prepare for an uncertain future dominated by rapid technological change, mobile workforces, and the need for culturally appropriate social and health services. Over two days the participants met to share perspectives and establish connections. More specifically, by reflecting on the special role of regional centres and their place in addressing Canada’s future challenges, we hoped to lay the groundwork for research focused on supporting the emerging needs of regional centres, and the rural and remote communities that they support. By exchanging narratives, histories, and perspectives among cultures from across the country, we sought, from a national perspective, to anticipate the role that regional centres will play in Canada’s future. This special collection in the Northern Review is meant to provide a glimpse into some of the conversations and issues discussed over the course of the two-day workshop. While this collection could not include the full breadth of the issues faced in regional centres, it does provide a look at critical issues—developing and supporting resilient local and regional food systems (Connie Nelson and Mirella Stroink); supporting small-scale commercial fisheries that have played an important role in northern food security, food sovereignty, and regional economies (Kristen Lowitt, Charles Levkoe, and Connie Nelson); northern rural sustainability planning and policy (Rebecca Schiff); community-based participatory research approaches to addressing housing and homelessness issues (Marleny Bonnycastle and Maureen Simpkins); and new tools for post-secondary education, which can encourage a deepening of conversations about place-based sustainability (David Greenwood and Devon Lee). These articles provide insight into the many strengths of, and challenges facing, northern, regional centres, and highlight our collective work toward development of more sustainable northern communities and regions. ReferencesHall, H, Vodden K, & Greenwood R. (2016). From dysfunctional to destitute: The governance of regional economic development in Newfoundland and Labrador. International Planning Studies, 22(2), 49–67. https://doi.org/10.1080/13563475.2016.1167585Hallstrom L, Beckie M, Hvenegaard G, & Mündel K. (2016). Sustainability planning and collaboration in rural Canada: Taking the next steps. University of Alberta Press.Halseth, G., & L. Ryser. (2006). Trends in service delivery: Examples from rural and small town Canada, 1998–2005. Canadian Geographer, 43, 69–90. https://journals.brandonu.ca/jrcd/article/view/40Hodge G, Hall H, & Robinson I. (2017). Planning Canadian regions (2nd ed.). UBC Press.Markey S, Breen S, Gibson R, Mealy R, & Ryser L. (2015). The state of rural Canada 2015. Canadian Rural Revitalization Foundation/Fondation canadienne pour la revitalisation rurale.Schiff, R. (2014). Rethinking governance: Supporting healthy development through systems-level collaboration in Canada’s provincial north. The Northern Review, 38, 133–154. https://thenorthernreview.ca/index.php/nr/article/view/329Vodden K, Hall H, & Freshwater D. (2014). Understanding regional governance in Newfoundland and Labrador: A survey of regional development organizations. Memorial University.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.003 |
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".