Is ‘eliminating’ remote diesel-generation just? Inuit energy, power, and resistance in off-grid communities of NunatuKavut
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nation states globally have signaled a rapid pursuit of net-zero emissions and transition to a low carbon economy. The country Canada is a part of this discourse and already has a largely decarbonized electricity grid, which is expected to grow substantially in the coming decades. Despite these ‘on-grid’ successes, remote, northern, and off-grid communities in Canada, most of which identify as Indigenous, remain almost wholly dependent on diesel fuel for space-heating and power generation. The agenda to transition remote communities off diesel-power is often driven by non-Indigenous outsiders, and seldom centers Indigenous knowledge, rights, or ways of being, potentially resulting in adverse socio-economic and ecological impacts and novel forms of ‘green’ colonialism. The current study is a participatory research partnership, between several university-based researchers, as well as representatives of the NunatuKavut Community Council – the rights-based governing body who represent Inuit across nine diesel-dependent communities in southern Labrador. The case-study research uses key informant interviews (n = 14) and a community member survey (n = 34) to assess how existing clean energy initiatives (policies, plans, programs, projects, etc.) in NunatuKavut have respected principles of energy justice. We discover and build upon several categories of distributional, procedural, and recognition injustice. Recognizing the potential harm of injustice discourses, we call on energy researchers to more meaningfully integrate strength-based approaches which focus on Indigenous resistance and response to energy domination. Finally, based on our results, we develop two novel schematics to help further understand distributive and procedural justice in the context of Indigenous energy governance.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".