A Refusal of State-Driven Northern Destiny: Deconstructing the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry Hearings
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation considers the incommensurable interests of people, fossil capital, federal energy politics, and place in Northern Canada during the 1970s. By the late 1960s, the insatiable North American appetite for fossil fuels had turned its attention toward the Arctic region. After the discovery of rich deposits in Prudhoe Bay, Alaska, in 1968, largescale energy projects were proposed to access and exploit these Arctic natural resources. Canada participated in this northern oil rush; an exploration of oil and gas in the Arctic regions was accelerated in the early 1970s. The next challenge involved transporting the oil and gas to southern markets. In 1974, the Canadian federal government initiated the Mackenzie Valley Pipeline Inquiry to investigate the social, environmental, and economic effects of the pipeline routes proposed by a consortium of American and Canadian oil companies through the Mackenzie River Valley in the Northwest Territories where it would connect with existing pipeline infrastructure in northern Alberta. The Inquiry’s report recommended against immediate construction, encouraging instead a ten-year moratorium. Inquiry commissioner Thomas Berger’s report rationalized the delay to make time for settling Indigenous land claims in the region and for taking conservation measures to protect some key areas in the Mackenzie River Valley. In this dissertation, I examine how the discussion around pipeline construction shaped the meaning of the North, self-determination, and cultural recognition. In this dissertation, I particularly focus on how Indigenous peoples asserted their claims by rejecting state-driven policies and the interests of fossil-fuel capitalism in the North.
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 | 0.017 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.050 | 0.064 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.012 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".