Founded on Ice and Tradition : A Comparative Examination of the Development and Effectiveness of the Inuit Circumpolar and Saami Councils
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There has been a great deal of interest in the Arctic governance in recent years, but littleof the interest has been in the indigenous peoples that populate it and the political structures theyuse to make themselves heard. In this thesis, these political structures, and the peoples that formthem, are studied in a historical context in order to determine how these structures weredeveloped, how their cultures have been effected by their relationship with non-indigenousgovernments and what affect both people and structure have had in their political environment.This was done through a qualitative comparative case study between the Sami of Scandinaviaand the Inuit of northern Canada and Alaska. From this study, it was determined that the level ofrelationship between indigenous and non-indigenous governments determined the degree towhich political bodies would occur and their ability affect their political environment. Followingthis relationship each case example developed a body for their own advocacy as a result ofsudden political pressure placed upon them. Overall, this thesis determines that the developmentof institutions is not fixed, but rather contingent to past events.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.000 | 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".