Ensam är inte stark i ett smältande men lukrativt Inuit Nunangat
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This comparative case study aims to analyze the strategies and levels of influence that local political actors in Nunavut, often with a clear representation of indigenous Inuit and First nation communities, assert towards larger monocentric actors at national and global levels of policy making. This by using the primary theory of Polycentric governance and additional postcolonial perspectives on the cases and policy processes of the Mary River mine expansion project, together with the implementation of Canada’s new Arctic framework of shipping and sovereignty linked to the emerging Northwest passage. After completing the study, the results of the study suggests that the decentralized territory of Nunavut is a good place for local actors to assert local influence by cooperation and being included in influencing decision making by providing local perspectives and knowledge. Something that however is made possible by the nature of the political system of Nunavut, trust and unique culture. However powerful private non-state actors together with still existing top down processes in national decision making over the territory show that the system is not without its flaws.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".