In the Face of “Climate Colonialism”: A Critical Analysis of the Government of Canada’s First Nation Adapt Program as a Settler Colonial Policy Response to the Climate Crisis in First Nations Communities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
First Nations communities have been planning adaptively with the environment since time immemorial and are now forced to respond to the colonial climate crisis. First Nation Adapt (FN Adapt), operated by the Government of Canada, provides funding to projects planning for these increasing changes in First Nations communities. However, the program’s position within a settler colonial institution requires interrogating FN Adapt, as such institutions have an ongoing legacy of enclosing Indigenous planning practices. This research provides a consolidated critique of the program by applying a test of enclosure, to see how the program interacts with Indigenous planning practices, outlined through literature on Indigenous Planning Theory, Anti-Colonial Planning Theory, and Indigenous Environmental Justice. Though FN Adapt makes strides towards supporting culturally relevant planning and fills a void in accessing necessary funding, its overarching government structures limit the program’s ability to fully support Indigenous planning, instead enclosing elements of Indigenous planning practices.
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 | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.072 | 0.036 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".