Circumpolar Inuit Protocols for Equitable and Ethical Engagement.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Circumpolar Inuit Protocols for Equitable and Ethical Engagement was developed through two primary processes: 1. An ICC-developed synthesis1 report of Inuit-produced materials and voices that address existing rules, laws, values, guidelines and protocols for the engagement of Inuit communities and Indigenous Knowledge, and 2. A series of workshops convening Inuit Delegates that captured Inuit knowledge, perspectives, needs, priorities and guidance on future engagement processes.2 Additionally, this work has been informed through decades of Inuit input to governments, international fora, negotiations, and ICC-led workshops, meetings, discussions, conferences, and projects occurring across communities, regionally, nationally and internationally. Our people from across Inuit Nunaat have reviewed the protocols. They have been agreed upon by the ICC Executive Council and formally approved. The world community is increasingly responsive to and respectful of the rights of Indigenous Peoples. However, for decades the interest in and research regarding the Arctic “cryosphere” has emerged without a full understanding of Inuit Nunaat -- our traditional homelands and territory, which includes Inuit, our way of life and our knowledge. Yet, through our persistence and our work as an Indigenous Peoples’ Organization, we are moving away from an approach that dismisses our Indigenous Knowledge and our way of living and closer to conditions that respect and recognize our distinct status, rights and role in the Arctic. The Circumpolar Inuit Protocols for Equitable and Ethical Engagement are intended by ICC as a pathway for others to understand this essential dynamic. Today we maintain that the “intricate knowledge” that our founder Eben Hopson invoked in 1977 is necessary for understanding the transformations that the Arctic region and indeed the world is facing. Knowledge and the co-production of knowledge consistent with Inuit perspectives, values, rights and protocols will result in a more genuine collective effort to create greater understanding about Inuit Nunaat, about the Arctic. Co-production of knowledge with Indigenous Peoples across the globe is gaining a foothold, bit by bit. Triggered to a substantial degree, by our input as well as our political and intellectual force, we are seeing evidence of this dynamic in various contexts ranging from the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change to the Agreement to Prevent Unregulated High Seas Fisheries in the Central Arctic Ocean to the Food and Agriculture Organization to the Arctic Council. This document should be accepted and seen by others as an invitation to consult and cooperate with Inuit by illustrating for researchers, decision-makers and others what is needed to genuinely be responsive to the urgent call for recognizing the interrelated, interdependent and indivisible rights of Inuit. The elements embraced in this publication can be employed by others in any facet of engagement with Inuit and the diverse subject matter that affects our day to day lives. We especially invite scientists, researchers, funders, and decision-makers to digest and ultimately implement these protocols with Inuit. Finally, we insist in a good way that overall results will produce a higher standard and quality of research beneficial for Inuit and all others.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 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".