Persuasive Forests for Maritime Britain: Canada and Britain’s Maritime Power from the War of the Spanish Succession to the Seven Years’ War
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines the role of Canadian forest resources in British imperial expansion, highlighting how environmental factors such as timber supply influenced imperial policies, naval strategies, and territorial acquisitions from the late seventeenth century to the mid-eighteenth century. Britain maintained a keen interest in North American forest resources from the perspective of enhancing its maritime power. This was articulated as a crucial consideration in the prosecution of warfare against France and imperial expansion in North America by contemporary politicians, administrators, military personnel, and pamphleteers. The British Empire's environmental approach to Canada, specifically regarding forest resources for naval power, was intimately connected with its approach to the Thirteen Colonies, while serving as justification for expansion into Canada. This study reveals how environmental rhetoric transformed into practical policy, particularly through the establishment of Halifax as a naval base. It also argues that expectations regarding natural resources, especially their naval value, served as a driving force behind imperial territorial expansion, emphasising the reciprocal relationship between political activities and environmental discourse. By examining how developments in one region influenced others, this study illuminates how territorial expansion and resource procurement expectations were bidirectionally linked, manifesting in political discourse during both war and peace.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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".