MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385847004 · doi:10.1353/nai.2023.a904201

I Will Live for Both of Us: A History of Colonialism, Uranium Mining, and Inuit Resistance by Joan Scottie, Warren Bernauer, and Jack Hicks (review)

2023· article· en· W4385847004 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueNative American and Indigenous Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismIndigenousResistance (ecology)HistoryNarrativeSociologyEthnologyArchaeologyArtLiteratureEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reviewed by: I Will Live for Both of Us: A History of Colonialism, Uranium Mining, and Inuit Resistance by Joan Scottie, Warren Bernauer, and Jack Hicks Riley Yesno (bio) I Will Live for Both of Us: A History of Colonialism, Uranium Mining, and Inuit Resistance by Joan Scottie, Warren Bernauer, and Jack Hicks University of Manitoba Press, 2022 it is always invigorating to find a book about Indigenous relationships with resource extraction that is firmly grounded in love and expertise gained through lived experience—I Will Live for Both of Us is such a book. The story is told from the first-person perspective of Joan Scottie, an Inuk woman and longtime community leader/activist, whose writing was aided by two non-Inuk researchers, Warren Bernauer and Jack Hicks. The three authors employ stories from Scottie's experiences of decades of front-line activism to provide readers with a thorough and accessible overview of community perspectives on mining in the Arctic and its relationship to settler colonialism. Scottie begins by retelling events and lessons from her own life and that of her family in Baker Lake, Nunavut, Canada. This section is emotionally moving and helpful in adding depth to later chapters. Indeed, Scottie's stories offer readers a glimpse into Inuit ways of life and their worldviews. As the book progresses, this glimpse makes especially clear how colonial industry and governments were able to mobilize their knowledge of Inuit worldviews to try to exploit communities for mineral resources. The remaining chapters focus on the decades of various consultation and negotiation processes between Inuit and the uranium industry/government. A particular focus is given to the tactics communities used to organize and oppose proponents of mining. Readers should anticipate that these later sections include many necessary but occasionally overwhelming details about the dozens of organizations and actors involved in the processes. In saying this, it is important to understand that this complexity is part of a lesson from the text. Put simply: if the multiple moving parts the authors traverse feel like a lot to keep track of for readers, even when laid out so plainly, one can imagine how much labor and overall diligence it took for Scottie and other Inuit leaders to keep on top of the developments over the decades. The chapters constitute a testament to the rigor and multifaceted nature of their community advocacy. [End Page 140] Overall, the authors have impressively and effectively included an extensive record of events, including dozens of actors over several decades. The authors' summarization skills are superb as are Scottie's recall and ability to interject feelings and memories associated with the numerous meetings and events discussed in the book. The approach keeps the reader grounded in the narrative while also providing plentiful background research. The text offers many valuable insights into community-led consultation, the importance of grassroots Indigenous activism, and the need to protect the rights of the land, animals, and people in the Far North. The main argument addresses how ongoing efforts to mine uranium in the Arctic are a continuation of settler colonialism—with especially devastating impacts on Inuit women. The argument is solidly supported by overviews of obvious violations of inherent Inuit rights, in addition to comparisons between the contemporary moment and some of Scottie's earliest memories about the onset of colonialism in the Arctic. The parallels in colonial objectives and Inuit resistance between these two times are insightful and indisputable. An interrelated secondary argument concerns how the current territorial government of Nunavut, often regarded as a form of Indigenous self-government by some scholars, is another form of colonial government operated by a greater number of Indigenous representatives. This argument may be particularly beneficial to those interested in Arctic governance and leaves room for more significant discussion about how Indigenous people define and operationalize self-government, and the limits of representation. One critique to note: other than in the opening chapter (and a brief mention near the end of the book), little in-depth attention is paid to how mining has specifically impacted Inuit women. This lack of investigation was unexpected, given how this impact was stated as an objective at the outset of...

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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 score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.005
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.333 · 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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNative American and Indigenous StudiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207