Indigenous ways of being and the Ecosystem Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Indigenous knowledge systems, ways of knowing and being have long been ignored or erased in the science, policy, and management of ecosystems. Through the 2022 Ecosystem Approach Conference and Synthesis Workshop focusing on Indigenous relationships, we facilitated discussions which raised key concerns from Indigenous led environmental teams: funding, collaborations, work/life balance, Indigeneity/Western/colonial balance, and racism. We discuss how conceptions of the Ecosystem Approach are synonymous with Indigenous management by definition and practice. Drawing on specific examples raised in workshop discussions and from the literature, we highlight how holistic approaches to the caring for and science of ecosystems have long been the way of Indigenous communities locally, globally, and across generations. To elevate these approaches and support this holistic vision of having relationship with ecosystems, we collectively call for better avenues of funding and responsive structures to support Indigenous-led initiatives. This requires that first we recognize Indigenous sovereignty and as settler and non-Indigenous scientists we invest in and maintain real relationships by listening to and standing with Indigenous Peoples in an effort to better support care for their Lands, Waters, and Kiin.
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 | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".