Inuit youth and environmental research: exploring engagement barriers, strategies, and impacts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Community leadership in Arctic environmental research is increasingly recognized as one of many pathways to Indigenous self-determination in Nunavut, Canada. While experienced Inuit hunters, trappers, and other recognized environmental knowledge experts are commonly included in research, similar opportunities for Inuit youth to meaningfully engage in environmental research remain limited. Finding ways to increase scientific literacy, particularly among Inuit youth, has been identified as an important step in the continuation of high-quality Arctic environmental research. This paper examines community perspectives on the roles and contributions of Inuit youth in environmental research in Nunavut, barriers that Inuit youth face in becoming meaningfully engaged in field-based environmental research, and strategies for enhancing Inuit youth engagement. Our study was conducted in Pond Inlet, Nunavut, and used interviews, workshops, and observation to gather stories and knowledge from community members about field- and land-based experiential learning pathways. This study found that a complex set of barriers, including a lack of credentials and support systems, among others, may inhibit meaningful Inuit youth engagement in environmental research. Key findings from the study support the view that collaborative land-based research activities can be an effective and meaningful method of enhancing scientific literacy among Inuit youth.
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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.010 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".