When the environment is destroyed, you're destroyed: Achieving Indigenous led pipeline justice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous communities in Canada are at high risk of suffering damage from, and disproportionately impacted by pipeline spills. However, historically their opposition to pipeline development has largely been unsuccessful. Based on socio-legal applied research including a legal analysis, as well as twenty interviews with Indigenous knowledge keepers in Alberta and Saskatchewan, this article explores Indigenous perspectives surrounding oil and gas pipelines, Indigenous pipeline justice, and specifically what an Indigenous led pipeline relation would look like. These research findings offer insight into future Indigenous energy justice. Two foundational pillars of Indigenous pipeline justice are: 1. Sovereignty/Treaty; and 2. Relations with Mother Earth and each other. Both are inextricably intertwined with conceptions of time and trust. Sacred treaty promises included sharing the land and its resources for as long as the sun shines and the waters flow. Mother Earth cannot be valued with money. Results highlight the opportunity for achieving Indigenous pipeline justice by implementing the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People and advancing recognition justice.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".