MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Local Government-First Nation Treaty Agreements in B.C.

2023· article· en· W4367399523 on OpenAlexafffundvenue
Gurleen Johal

Bibliographic record

VenueFederalism-E · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsTreatyIndigenousGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceNegotiationLegislationContext (archaeology)LawCommissionPublic administrationGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although there have been efforts from both federal and local governments towards reconciliation in recent times, there are very few modern treaties in B.C. An important component of reconciliation is repairing relations between the government and First Nations and treaties are an important way of doing so. Treaties according to the BC Treaty Commission are legal agreements between First Nations, and the provincial and federal government that ensures Indigenous rights and promotes reconciliation. Specifically, modern treaties can enable Indigenous self-governance, self-determination, economic sufficiency and land ownership. In 1991, BC Task Force joined and made new recommendations to improve the BC treaty process, leading to new provincial legislation about treaty-making in BC. As a result, the local government and First Nations made stronger efforts to engage in treaty negotiations across the province. Although several First Nations have participated in the treaty-making process, BC has only successfully signed seven modern treaties. Of the seven, the Tsawwassen treaty is the only treaty in an urban area. This paper aims to explore why there are so few modern treaties between the local government and First Nations in an urban context. Ultimately, this paper will draw from the Tsawwassen, Musqueam, Squamish and Tsleil-Waututh Nations to discuss the barriers that explain the limited number of modern treaties in BC and why some First Nations groups are reluctant to engage in treaty agreements with the local government.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.902

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFederalism-ESame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207