Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit and Western science: examples of research that demonstrate sovereignty and self-determination in the face of complex impacts from climate change
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research in Inuit Nunangat, the Inuit homelands in Canada, historically failed to meaningfully engage host communities. After years of Inuit actively advocating for respect and inclusion, some practitioners of Western science are recognizing that past research practices have been either harmful or of little benefit to Inuit. As climate change rapidly transforms the Arctic, Inuit are facing environmental changes that threaten their culture, lifestyle, and livelihoods. By combining expert local knowledge and values (Inuit Qaujimajatuqangit, or IQ) with Western science, Inuit are embracing combined knowledge systems—dubbed Science + IQ by the youth-led, Nunavut-based nonprofit, Ikaarvik—to increase resilience and self-determination in the face of climate change. This paper highlights three examples: (1) an Inuk youth’s experience as an early member of Ikaarvik; (2) SmartICE, a social enterprise that supports safe sea ice travel by integrating sea ice IQ with technology; and (3) SIKU: The Indigenous Knowledge App, developed by the Arctic Eider Society with Inuit and Indigenous partners, providing tools for harvesters and research management. Key messages for researchers include the importance of understanding and upholding Indigenous sovereignty and self-determination by building projects with Inuit and reviewing Inuit-written ethical guidelines and implementing them throughout all stages of research.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".