Arctic Entrance: Opening the door to alternative trajectories for Indigenous housing through a decolonizing of planning practice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Indigenous communities across Canada are facing a crisis in housing. In response, new and innovative designs, policies, and programs are being developed in attempt to shift away from harmful colonial-imposed models to ones that advance autonomy, healthy living, and cultural revitalization. This important shift has sparked debate and speculation about what a reclaiming or “decolonization” of planning looks like in practice. To explore what this emergent planning paradigm means in the context of rural, remote, and northern Indigenous communities, I interviewed experts working in or with Indigenous communities across Canada and Alaska, USA, in addition to undertaking case study and action research with the First Nation of Na-cho Nyäk Dun in Yukon, Canada. In contributing to established principles of good planning with Indigenous communities, my research suggests that a decolonized approach to housing planning is one that is inclusive off all community groups, integrates multiple objectives and needs, is sensitive to the surrounding landscape, builds on past work, sparks creativity and innovation, enables better understanding of both possibilities and trade-offs, and creates tangible and immediate change on the ground while acting with a long-term focus. My findings also suggests that there are particular planning considerations that should be taken into account when working in the north, and that planning as a practice should be reflexively critiqued, rethought, and transformed if it is to serve in support of communities in their self-determined transformation.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".