Re-Considering Market Development Approaches to Support Nunavut Inuit Priorities in the Seal Market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Seal hunting is a long-standing cultural practice for Inuit, who have also long participated in the commercial seal market. Inuit were negatively impacted by anti-sealing campaigns that resulted in international trade bans and subsequent market collapses for seal products. To improve market access for Inuit seal products, the Canadian government established the Certification and Market Access Program for Seals (CMAPS) to support export of Inuit seal products in European Union markets. In 2015, the Government of Nunavut became an Attestation Body under the EU Indigenous Communities Exemption, which enables the Government to certify Nunavut seal products for export into EU markets. To date, market development efforts have largely focused on supporting the export market for Nunavut sealskins, while less attention has focused on how such efforts impact the local value chain and meet the needs of Nunavut Inuit involved in the seal market. Focus group discussions with Inuit value chain actors in Iqaluit and Qikiqtarjuaq provide insight into the Nunavut seal value chain and explore perspectives of how government policies and programmes are meeting the needs of Nunavut Inuit. Findings revealed multiple gaps in the local value chain that have gone largely unaddressed due to a priority on export markets over the local value chain. These gaps limit export development opportunities and the ability for the seal market to adequately meet the needs of Nunavut Inuit and Nunavummiut alike. Collectively, this study demonstrates the importance of centralizing Inuit in economic development policies to support local economies and ensure Inuit priorities are met.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".