Foresters and Forestry in Canada : Beginnings and Development of an applied Science in the eastern Provinces (1880s-1940s)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Beginning in the 1880s, foresters around the world faced problems such as forest fires, pest infestations, and the shrinking of timber resources. This stimulated the intensification of research activities on forest environments and brought about a large-scale globalization of forestry science. Distinct scientific spaces and specific competencies emerged from a transnational dialogue characterized by exchanges and appropriations, but also by scientific disputes shaped by a variety of approaches towards nature and landscapes, as well as confrontations with complex forest environments.This thesis retraces the ways in which forestry knowledge and practices circulated in eastern Canada (Quebec, Ontario, New Brunswick), at the crossroad between European and American influences, from the 1880s to the 1940s. It sheds light on the forces that contributed to their transformation into a transatlantic science, as well as on the process of blending theories and practices on the ground. Studying the development over time of the science of forestry in eastern Canada uncovers the reasons behind the importation of foreign forestry practices on the Canadian soil, but also the economic, cultural, and ideological limits of those transfers. More broadly, it contributes to the literature examining the ways sciences evolve, the manner in which they are constructed, and their geographic contingencies. In the first half of the 20th century, eastern Canadian forestry emerged as a hybrid discipline pursuing its own economic and scientific agenda. It selected from various external sources the elements it judged relevant and combined them with methods developed on its own soil.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".