Limits of Sustainability: Greenlandic Inuit and the Western Idea of Nature Conservation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As the conflicts over the management of natural resources or the right to hunt whales show, the increasingly interconnectedness of the world has brought about new consequences for local people in Greenland. In my opinion the dispute over hunting and whaling results from the clash of different cultural concepts of nature, nature conservation and sustainability and the failure of the various parties to develop a sensitivity for inter-cultural processes of communication. Nature is no universal concept, meaning the same for everyone no matter what culture he or she belongs to. Whereas mostly European biologists and environmentalists try to implement their concepts of “nature conservation” and “sustainability” known from the societies of origin, the Greenlandic Inuit articulate their own concept emphasizing the unspoiled Greenlandic nature and the impossibility of its destruction. It is in fact a concept, which dates back to a concept used by European missionaries, traders, explorers and whalers who invented the Greenlanders as a primitive people who lived in harmony with nature. In taking over the role that was allocated by Europeans, Greenlanders got recognition in the global power struggle. They entered the discourse and were able to change it. After the publication of the book "Farvel til Grønlands Natur" ("A Farewell to Greenland's Wildlife") in 2001, where the journalist Kjeld Hansen is deconstructing the image of Greenlanders living in harmony with their environment, the scope for action will be limited for Inuit in the near 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 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 | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.056 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".