Environmental Justice: Making It A Reality For The Inuit Indigenous People In The Canadian Arctic Region
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At the heart of this policy briefing is the issue of environmental justice. “Inuit want to be involved in the future of the Arctic. We want to have meaningful consultation. We want to invest in our own future. We want a voice at the table because, after all, we are the people who will be living here ...” OKALIK EEGEESIAK, President Qikiqtani Inuit Association, Iqaluit, Nunavut (2011) The Inuit Indigenous People in the Canadian Arctic (IIPCA), like many other indigenous people in other parts of Canada and world over, are victims of historical injustices resulting from colonization and dispossession of their land1. While there is no one universal definition that encompasses the diversity of indigenous peoples2, their common traditional way of life as well as the intimate connection to their environment sets them apart. The relationship between the Canadian government and the Inuit indigenous people has been one shaped by a strained history, characterised by land grabs, and relocation and assimilation policies. As the country continues to face the legacy of this history and forge policies that encourage reconciliation, the emerging opportunities for oil and gas exploration in the Arctic present a potential clash between exploitation of such opportunities and the reconciliation process. As Canada attempts to enforce policies that address the unique needs of the Arctic environment and those of the indigenous people living in the Arctic region- especially in light of Arctic oil exploration; such policies prove to be insufficient, or insufficiently implemented, and environmental injustices and grievances ensue. Apart from identifying policy gaps limiting the promotion of environmental justice for the Inuit people in the Arctic region and offering policy recommendation, the paper is also aimed at highlighting and analysing the context and issues underlying such policies.
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.091 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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".