MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7019845776

Indigenous Water Justice In Manitoba Through Engagement In Water Governance

2021· dissertation· en· W7019845776 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan) · 2021
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousInjusticeCorporate governanceWater resourcesGovernment (linguistics)Environmental justiceEconomic JusticeLegislation
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally, negative impacts on water resources from land development, pollution, and climate change demand greater attention to more effective water governance. In settler colonial countries such as Canada, these negative impacts alter Indigenous relationships with water, land, and each other, and contribute to water insecurity and water injustice for Indigenous peoples. Greater engagement of Indigenous peoples in water governance, research, management, and planning is arguably one way to address negative impacts on water resources in Indigenous communities, but not all types of engagement are as effective as others. I characterize Indigenous engagement in water governance from three geographic scales. A narrative review of the water governance literature finds that Indigenous engagement in settler-colonial nations is generally lacking in both legislation and practice, perpetuating water injustice for Indigenous people. At a regional scale engagement, I examine the degree to which Indigenous participation occurs in provincial watershed planning in Manitoba. At the community-scale, a case study documents the impacts of historic and contemporary water-related decisions as felt by members of Wuskwi Sipihk First Nation, and their efforts in response. Participant observation and interviews with key informants provides practical insight into the water-related challenges facing the community and others in the province. Globally, multiple mechanisms and pathways to water justice are evident in the review, but their efficacy is highly contingent. In Manitoba, inclusion of Indigenous peoples in watershed planning is uneven, and there is limited evidence that Aboriginal and Treaty rights influence rates or nature of participation. Provincially decisions about water are made across different government departments, and Indigenous rights are unevenly recognized and respected between them. Additionally, existing regulatory processes and institutions, while procedurally fair, are not empowered to recognize or accommodate Aboriginal and Treaty rights. In this way, water governance is de-politicized, and settler and capitalist values are privileged above Indigenous rights and values. More support is needed to enhance Indigenous participation in watershed planning and water governance to attain water justice. Enhanced coordination, alternative institutional arrangements, and greater recognition and respect of Indigenous rights are needed to ensure water justice is attainable by Indigenous communities in Manitoba.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.252
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.202 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUniversity Library (University of Saskatchewan)Same topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207