Sustainable Development in the Northwest Territories: Rhetoric or Reality? An Eco-Socialist Examination of the Proposed Mackenzie Gas Project
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This presentation will address the central question - can we balance sustainability and economic growth in the Northwest Territories (NWT) within the framework of capitalist development? The proposed Mackenzie Gas Project will have enormous implications for the people and land in the NWT; thus, it is important to understand the process and politics behind its environmental assessment. With a price tag of $7 billion and the largest “development” in the history of Canada’s north (Wright Mansell Research Limited) – it would fragment intact boreal forests along the Mackenzie River, Canada’s wildest big river, and damage habitat for species such as woodland caribou and grizzly bear (Wildlife Management Advisory Council). The proposed project will double the NWT’s greenhouse gas emissions (Pembina Institute), and it is slated to fuel further development of Alberta’s tar sands, which produces the most damaging type of oil for the global atmosphere, through another pipeline to Fort McMurray (First Energy Capital Corporation). Other questions to be explored include how the oil and gas lobby influences the policymaking of the Government of the Northwest Territories and Aboriginal self-governments and organizations; is the Joint Review Panel independently reviewing the environmental, social and cultural impacts of the proposed Mackenzie Gas Project, according to its mandate, and, what are the opportunities for and challenges facing environmental non-governmental organizations and citizen resistance to the proposed Mackenzie Gas Project?
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 | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".