MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7033688542

Pushing for Better: Confronting Conflict, Unsustainability & Colonialism through Sustainability Assessment and Regional Assessment in the Ring of Fire

2019· dissertation· en· W7033688542 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueUWSpace (University of Waterloo) · 2019
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies of Medieval Iberia
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernment (linguistics)PopulationSustainabilityResource (disambiguation)Risk assessment
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ring of Fire is a mineral resource-rich area of approximately 5,120 km2 located in the James Bay Lowlands region of Northern Ontario, about 500 kilometers northeast of Thunder Bay. The Ontario Ministry of Northern Development and Mines generously estimates the Ring of Fire to contain $60 billion worth of minerals. The Ontario government and industry envision that the Ring of Fire could be a region with multi-generational mining activity. However, the area has no historical or current industrial activity, and no road or rail access. Also, mining proposals in this resource rich, inaccessible and ecologically sensitive area have generated significant controversy and conflict because the potential for wealth generation is accompanied by the potential for significant and possibly serious net negative lasting cumulative effects and poorly distributed benefits and risks, particularly for First Nations communities, including Eabametoong First Nation. 
\nOne major method of anticipating and planning for the effects of industrial development is environmental assessment. However, my research finds that traditional assessment methods are woefully inadequate for considering the potential regional impacts of the Ring of Fire on the land, waters and communities. Conventional assessment is insufficient to identify and address cumulative effects, and it does not provide an adequate base for determining whether proposed developments are likely contribute to lasting well-being and sustainability. These inadequacies are particularly challenging for the most vulnerable communities, where these deficiencies threaten to perpetuate long standing colonialism and conflict. 
\nThe findings suggest that Canadian resource development processes at large would be considerably assisted if anticipatory assessment and decision making focused on the actual (in this case regional) scale of the potential effects, examined the potential for lasting overall gains, and integrated fair process with equitable relationships and substantive consideration of context-dependent sustainability. In this research, assessment criteria were developed in collaboration with Eabametoong First Nation for application in the Ring of Fire utilizing generic sustainability criteria, existing academic data and Eabametoong’s own perspectives. Central to the resulting assessment framework is the need to foster consent, respect indigenous rights and utilize indigenous knowledge. My findings indicate that much of the mainstream discussion on the Ring of Fire has framed the key debates as economy versus the environment, and have situated the current project-centred environmental assessment processes as a venue for battles over these priorities. A broader and more positive approach, using regional strategic assessments to find pathways to lasting overall benefits for the Ring of Fire communities and area, is not yet on the agenda. This research found that a more comprehensive package that utilizes assessment not simply as a box check, but as a means to enhance the lives of Eabametoong First Nations and other communities, would better ensure that development in the region contributes to a sustainable future.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.991

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.247 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWSpace (University of Waterloo)Same topicHistorical Studies of Medieval IberiaFrench-language works237,207