Oil and Gas Developments: Prospects for Sustainable Community Life?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
It is possible that Les-Îsles-de-la-Madeleine sit close to an oil and gas field muchlarger than Hibernia. Should you be very happy about this, cautiously optimistic, \nor bitterly opposed? By looking at experience elsewhere, I shall reach my ownconclusion and at least give you information that you may find useful in forming \nyour opinions. First, a quote about Alberta. \nThe demands of the tar sands originate in the unstable, shifting politics and economics of world energy, in the investment strategies of the international petroleum industry, and in the policies of our own governments. Such demands have little in common with the needs of thosemost likely to be affected by development, and they have little to do with the best interests of Albertans and other Canadians in deriving the maximum benefit from the use of their exhaustible resources (Larry Pratt, \nThe Tar Sands, 1976). \nThirty-five years later, much the same could be written about the impact of oilsands development in Alberta. Will these words describe what will happen in LesÎsles-de-la-Madeleine? What will development mean for community \nsustainability? Is this a blessing that assures survival or a curse filled with false promises? The notion of oil as a curse comes from many cases in which local \nresidents fail to capture a reasonable share of the value of the resource or experience a decline in their quality of their life. How do local and regional authorities relate to the oil and gas industry? Can they be effective in linking that development to community sustainability? These are my questions. \nActually, I have often questioned the use of both community and sustainability, and the implicit values they convey. Community refers loosely to groups of people who have some common interest or values. When the common \ninterest is place of residence, I have no problem with it. The further implication is that members of a community share common values and ways of behaving. I \nthink this is highly misleading and romanticized when applied to localities.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.005 |
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".