MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3045728111 · doi:10.3390/su12156050

“That’s Our Traditional Way as Indigenous Peoples”: Towards a Conceptual Framework for Understanding Community Support of Sustainable Energies in NunatuKavut, Labrador

2020· article· en· W3045728111 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Nicholas Mercer, Amy Hudson, Debbie Martin, Paul Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Acceptance of Renewable Energy
Canadian institutionsDalhousie UniversityGovernment of NunavutUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsIndigenousRenewable energyIndigenous rightsSustainable communityEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceBusinessSustainable developmentEnvironmental planningGeographyEconomicsEngineeringEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

There is a substantial body of literature in North America regarding the social acceptance of renewable energies, particularly wind energy. However, limited research focuses on the experiences of Indigenous Peoples. Furthermore, several researchers have called for a rapid transition to renewable energies in Indigenous off-grid diesel powered communities in Canada, while limited research has considered local support for this transition, which neglects the Indigenous right of free, prior, and informed consent for developments on or which affect their territories. Working in partnership with nine Indigenous off-grid communities in southeast Labrador, we assess community-member perceptions and support of sustainable energies via hybrid interviews/surveys (n = 211) and key informant interviews (n = 11). Applying directed content analysis and participatory methodologies, we find that five primary themes influence Indigenous support for sustainable energies in southeast Labrador: (1) Community familiarity and understanding; (2) association with previous projects; (3) relationships with culture and sustenance; (4) endogeneity of resources; (5) energy security impacts. The themes should be viewed as a framework for understanding community support, not a definitive recipe for reaching consent. Applying these themes, we demonstrate broad community support for conventional renewables (wind, solar), reluctance towards emerging renewables (biomass, tidal, wave) and energy storage (pumped hydro, battery), and wide opposition for hydroelectricity and small modular nuclear. We demonstrate that energy efficiency applications maintain substantially higher support than most supply-side options. Supply-side sustainable energies have the potential to perpetuate the colonial or extractive nature of resource development in Indigenous communities, while energy efficiency applications more directly facilitate energy security and protect energy sovereignty.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.537
Threshold uncertainty score0.920

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0210.034
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0030.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.249 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicSocial Acceptance of Renewable EnergyFrench-language works237,207