Space, History and Law: Rethinking Canadian Territorial Claims in the Arctic
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The aim of this thesis is to assess the Canadian territorial claims in the Arctic in relation to the UNCLOS III, by linking this contemporary legal framework for managing change in the Arctic region with historical processes pertaining to the "use" of the Arctic space by the Canadian society. Canada has a long history of association with its Arctic territory and recent Russian claims over the rights to extract resources of the North Pole area have stirred new tensions around the region. The receding Arctic ice pack has opened up the possibility of the Northwest Passage becoming a viable trading route, over which the Canadians plan to have full sovereign rights. Rising global demand for resource wealth has also meant that as the Canadian Arctic ice continues to melt the region is increasingly coming under the global geopolitical spotlight. This thesis analyzes and assesses the Canadian contemporary sovereign territorial claims in the region, whilst emphasizing the link between current geopolitical and legal tensions and the history of exploration and development in the Canadian Arctic. The North, or at least the idea of 'North', has long haunted the Canadian imagination. Therefore, any challenges to Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic region are fundamentally challenges to Canadian identity. The purpose of the historical analysis within this paper is to demonstrate that the Canadian Arctic was, in fact, discovered and explored not by Canada and not for Canada, and for a long time the North was seen as something 'Other' from the Canadian whole. Much of Canada's recent claims within its Arctic territory are based upon its ' historic title' in the North, which argues that its people, the Canadian Inuit, have long lived in its Northern lands, and therefore, Canada has long had an interest in the region. A main hypothesis of this thesis, however, is that as a result of the socially constructed idea that Canada's North as something different or 'Other' from the Canadian whole, Canada has long ignored its Northern responsibilities. A central argument of this paper is that it is impossible to fully appreciate the potency of contemporary legal issues within the Canadian Arctic without first understanding how the Northern space was shaped by a long period of exploration, which in turn informed how the Northern space was socially constructed as part of the emerging Canadian nation.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".