The Regulation and Litigation of Cumulative Effects on Indigenous Rights Following the Yahey Decision and Blueberry River First Nation Settlement and the Potential Effects on the Energy Industry
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The British Columbia Supreme Court issued a groundbreaking decision in Yahey v. British Columbia: the Crown had failed to uphold its treaty obligations due to the cumulative effects of over 100 years of development. In response to the 2021 decision, British Columbia and Blueberry River First Nation have reached a multi-million dollar investment agreement which includes joint decision-making powers regarding future development. Yahey’s novel reasoning has significant implications for energy and resource development, treaty relations, and litigation across Canada. Similar claims have now been filed in Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Ontario, including Duncan’s First Nation seeking to apply Yahey’s reasoning in northwest Alberta. If courts across Canada adopt Yahey, land management decision-making could fundamentally change across much of the country.
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 | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".