MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379619758 · doi:10.1353/his.2023.a899607

Levelling the Lake: Transboundary Resource Management in the Lake of the Woods Watershed by Jamie Benedickson (review)

2023· article· en· W4379619758 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Mark Kuhlberg

Bibliographic record

VenueHistoire sociale · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLevellingWatershedResource (disambiguation)Flood mythNatural resourceGeographyArchaeologyLawPolitical scienceCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: Levelling the Lake: Transboundary Resource Management in the Lake of the Woods Watershed by Jamie Benedickson Mark Kuhlberg Benedickson, Jamie–Levelling the Lake: Transboundary Resource Management in the Lake of the Woods Watershed. Vancouver: UBC Press, 2019. 366 p. Jamie Benedickson’s Levelling the Lake recounts the history of the truly remarkable array of thorny issues that have affected the administration of the greater Lake of the Woods watershed in northwestern Ontario (i.e., including the upstream waterways to the east such as Rainy Lake and River and Shoal Lake). In presenting his case, Benedickson has produced a comprehensive and valuable account of a relatively ignored section of Canada. It convincingly demonstrates that considerations involving geography, politics, and economics—indeed, practically every consideration imaginable—combined to make this a most complicated natural asset to administer. Benedickson chooses an apt metaphor to describe and understand this profoundly complex situation. He does so by borrowing from American legal scholar Lon Fuller, who coined the term polycentric to describe instances in which many competing interests faced off against each other. Fuller compared these situations to a spider’s web, whereby “‘pulling one of its strands will distribute tensions after a complicated pattern throughout the web as a whole. Doubling the original pull will, in all likelihood, not simply double each of the resulting tensions but will rather create a different complicated pattern of tensions … This is a ‘polycentric’ situation, because it is ‘many-centred’—each crossing of strands is a distinct centre for distributing tensions’” (pp. xxvii–xxviii). Benedickson admirably outlines the multiple forces that rendered the Lake of the Woods watershed such a battleground of conflicting interests. On the most basic level, the area spills across national (Canada-United States), provincial (Ontario-Manitoba), and state (Minnesota) boundaries, and includes numerous municipalities (the most important of which are Winnipeg, Fort Frances, and Kenora). Jurisdictional and constitutional clashes among these levels of government are legendary in both countries, and the Lake of the Woods watershed served as another venue for fighting them. Moreover, a host of parties prized the local waterways for different and often antithetical reasons. Industrialists, for example, eyed them beginning around the turn of the twentieth century for their potential to generate vast amounts of hydroelectricity. Realizing this aim involved reconstructing the local environment—damming lakes and rivers and interrupting the natural water cycle—to maximize its potential to produce energy. In contrast, fishers—Indigenous, Canadian, and American—saw the water in a very different light. From their perspective, the highest priority was to protect its capacity to sustain a number of valuable fish species that they could catch for personal, commercial, and recreational purposes. Realizing their aims typically involved leaving the waterways as undisturbed and clean as possible, a goal that canoeists (the author is a noted one) also sought because [End Page 187] they cherished paddling the region’s waterways while soaking in what they saw as the sublime beauty of the local landscape. Further complicating matters were the local residents and municipal officials, who paradoxically sought clean drinking water but also considered the waterways to be appropriate dumping grounds for their waste. Benedickson provides plenty of evidence to demonstrate how the battles over the Lake of the Woods watershed involved more than its water. For example, lumbermen sought to gain control over and cut the region’s larger-diameter timber—primarily pine and spruce—and convert it into solid wood products. Similarly, pulp and paper makers aimed to harvest the area’s spruce and balsam fir (and later jack pine), which they could convert into a range of consumer goods. Furthermore, for much of the twentieth century, these forest industries used the local waterways to transport both their logs to and waste from their mills; the pulp and paper producers also needed enormous volumes of clean water in their manufacturing processes. In contrast, mining interests valued the local rock for the valuable minerals that it contained. While the early gold mines were small and caused relatively minor disturbance to the local environment, the development of the Steep Rock Iron mine near Atikokan during the Second World War entailed the draining of a lake and the...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.004

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistoire socialeSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207