MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392815984 · doi:10.29173/jaed324

Off-Reserve Employment Options For On-Reserve First Nations In Canada

2013· article· en· W4392815984 on OpenAlexaffabout
Philip Lashley, M. Rose Olfert

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Aboriginal Economic Development · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsResidenceNature reservePopulationReserve requirementPopulation growthBusinessEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsDemographic economicsDemographyCentral bank

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alternative land management options for First Nations are intended to improve their well-being through on-Reserve economic development. Another means by which First Nations are increasing their participation in the economy is through migration off Reserve, primarily urban centres. A third, to date neglected, means by which First Nations participate in the economy is through accessing off-Reserve employment while retaining Reserve residence. While positive urban agglomeration spillovers in the form of employment opportunities for rural populations are well established for the general population, this has not been investigated for Reserve populations. This paper examines the incidence and determinants of off-Reserve employment by Reserve residents in Canada. We find that along with distance, population growth rates and a higher percentage of the population over the age of 15, out-commuting rates from Reserves are influential in Community Well-Being Scores. Out-commuting is, in turn, facilitated by high school completion rates and negatively affected by distance. We conclude that improved access to off-Reserve employment for Reserve residents is an important means of improving the well-being of Reserve populations, and that a high school education is associated with off-Reserve employment.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.128

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Aboriginal Economic DevelopmentSame topicMining and Resource ManagementFrench-language works237,207