MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412276141

Pipeline negotiations as a challenging setting for organised cultural encounters:An Analysis of Mackenzie Gas Project Public Hearings from Berger Inquiry to Nowadays

2015· article· en· W4412276141 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Valeria Guerrieri

Bibliographic record

VenueResearch at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen) · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRhetoric and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationGas pipelinePipeline (software)Political scienceEngineeringPetroleum engineeringLawMechanical engineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Within the context of resource extraction, cultural encounters have been historically performed in the way of more or less antagonistic social interactions, ranging from outright domination to more empowerment-oriented relations. Throughout the last decades, the building of pipelines in particular has linked together countries, cultures, identities, ultimately challenging, reorganizing and renegotiating them.<br/>Starting from these premises, the following paper intends to show how Canadian Mackenzie Valley represents a unique contact zone for the development of cultural encounters, where different actors sometimes clash, but eventually “grapple with each other”. In order to do so, I look into the specific case of Mackenzie Valley Pipeline and its advancement from the early 70s to more recent times, to suggest that within this challenging setting - where indigenous peoples are constantly confronted with often competing interests and positions - the practice of public hearings can be approached as a form of organized cultural encounter, whose “implied purposes” are to deal with more or less substantial cultural differences and to provide a wider cultural understanding of each different position.<br/>Through the testimonies presented during the negotiations of the Mackenzie Gas Project, I explore the main features of the institutionalized practice of community hearings to suggest that this system has produced two main results, leading to the creation of: a) an essential forum for confrontation and articulation of cultural diversities and divergent perspectives on energy development and indigenous issues; b) a unique social space that has contributed to trigger phenomenon of identity<br/>transformation and new ways of structuring relations among the several pipeline stakeholders.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.153
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.248
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.105 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueResearch at the University of Copenhagen (University of Copenhagen)Same topicRhetoric and Communication StudiesFrench-language works237,207