Learning from Inuit perspectives on marine governance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our ocean is undergoing drastic changes. In the circumpolar north, this reality is highly visible. Social-ecological systems thinking informs that social and ecological systems are intertwined, yet hegemonic governance systems appear unable or unwilling to reorient themselves to promote planetary health amidst the climate crisis. To rethink our relationship with the ocean, I explore the research question, “What can I learn from Inuit perspectives about the ocean and marine governance within Inuit Nunangat, and how does this relate to planetary health?” This study applies critical theory methodologies. In particular, feminist standpoint theory informs the approach of engaging with knowledge and lived experience of marginalized or oppressed populations. Inuit knowledge in the form of a purposefully sampled collection of publicly available Inuit documents that relate to the marine environment is the primary evidence that informs analysis. Inuit produced declarations, websites, and reports are analysed using thematic analysis. This study does not depend on ethics review or community engagement; research using publicly available information is exempt from these ethical requirements. Nevertheless, the positionality I strive to embody is allyship with Inuit. Two main themes are interpreted from analysis. First, the meaning of the marine contains the key ideas: Inuit culture relies upon marine ecosystems; rapidly social-ecological systems have cultural implications; and environmental protection focuses on marine areas of significance. A rights-based approach reflects the assertions: Inuit are rightsholders not stakeholders; political equality is still hindered by systems of racism and oppression; and collaborative governance approaches are the path forward. Governance mechanisms that recognize Indigenous rights have the capacity to promote planetary health. Inuit self-determination is health promotion, supporting marine protection, equitable marine governance, and strengthening Inuit culture. Decision-making systems that are characterized by polycentricity, community collaboration, and a respect for Indigenous knowledge present a path forward.
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 | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".