“Stretch and transform” for energy justice: Indigenous advocacy for institutional transformative change of electricity in British Columbia, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Transformative energy justice addresses root causes and legacies of inequality, centers voices and world views of historically excluded communities in the problem definition, decision making and transition processes. This study offers insights from a unique case of meso-level collective action by First Nations in British Columbia (BC), Canada, aimed at transformative electricity institutional change. We collate regulatory and advocacy text to characterise the range of proposed First Nation Power Authority models and their placement along a continuum of conformative to transformative energy justice. Interviews with knowledge holders from 14 First Nations offer insight into motivations behind transformative change and how it is shaped by historical injustice alongside practical community objectives around energy security, resilience, and community development. First Nations narratives of electricity transformation are aligned with the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of Indigenous People (UNDRIP) and with goals of self-determination and incorporate relational and regional approaches. These findings validate theoretical frameworks of transformational energy justice (Avelino et al., 2024; Elmallah et al., 2022). Much of the groundwork has been laid by the collective and the regulator, while new legislation has opened a window of opportunity to increase Indigenous participation and control in the electricity sector.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".