Constructing the Settler Sovereign & the Mechanics of Power Distribution: Hydroelectricity and Biopolitics in James Bay and Northern Québec, 1970s-1990s
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis discusses the relationship between hydroelectric development in Northern Québec and the institutionalization of health in Cree and Inuit communities of Eeyou Istchee (James Bay) from the 1970s to the 1990s. It explores the deployment of nutritional science by the Québec Ministry of Health as a response to health issues exacerbated by the flooding of large areas of ancestral hunting and fishing territories and the resulting relocation of Indigenous communities. With particular attention to the roles of distinctly Franco-Québécois notions of sovereignty, gender, race, and anthropocentrism, this research seeks to assess political discourses about energy and health over the course of the second wave of hydroelectric nationalisation in the province. I begin by examining two court cases leading to the adoption of the James Bay and Northern Québec Agreement in 1975 – namely the Malouf decision and its appeal – to uncover the ideological underpinnings of the territorial negotiations between the Cree and Inuit and the Québec government. I then turn to the ways in which the Québec Ministry of Health targeted Indigenous mothers in the region through mechanisms of biopolitics in responding to health issues exacerbated by the destruction of Cree and Inuit foodways. In sum, this thesis problematizes the idea of hydroelectricity as a “green” energy in the Québec context by examining the impact of environmental destruction resulting from the building of dams in James Bay on the livelihood of directly affected Indigenous communities. It further highlights the persistence and creativity of the Eeyou Cree and Inuit in resisting encroachment on their lands and waters.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".