MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W850476776

Knowing caribou : Inuit, ecological science and traditional ecological knowledge in the Canadian North

2006· dissertation· en· W850476776 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Bates

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · 2006
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyEcologyEcological psychologyPsychologyBiology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I document the knowledge forms of three distinct constituencies operating in the community of Cambridge Bay in the Canadian Arctic: its Inuit inhabitants, visiting ecological scientists and researchers documenting ‘traditional ecological knowledge’ (TEK). I explore the relationships that develop between them during attempts to understand the Dolphin-Union caribou herd, which inhabits Victoria Island and the adjacent mainland. I argue that there are fundamental differences between what ecologists, TEK researchers and Inuit understand to constitute knowledge and that these currently impair efforts at collaboration. I show what these differences are and suggest how they might be transcended. I pursue these themes through an ethnographic study of the ways in which relationships between risk and knowledge are played out in practice among Inuit hunters, scientific ecologists and TEK researchers. Following the work of Beck (1986), I argue that modern conceptions of risk fundamentally underpin the structure and focus of western science, giving priority to knowledge that will aid prediction, control and management. Meanwhile Inuit hunters, operating largely outside of modernity’s preoccupation with risk, find these concerns rather unnecessary. I move on to address the underlying epistemological similarity between Inuit knowledge and scientific ecological knowledge. This similarity is often obscured by representations of scientific knowledge as comprising an accumulation of discrete, prepositional, impersonal products. An ethnographic account of the processes that contribute to the formation of ecological science and Inuit knowledge shows that in practice, both rest on learning by experience within a process of engaged activity. Focusing on the similarities at this fundamental level I suggest how scientific and Inuit knowledge may be integrated in a way that remains faithful to Inuit understandings of what it is to know caribou.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.967
Threshold uncertainty score0.507

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.006
Science and technology studies0.0330.026
Scholarly communication0.0100.005
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.297 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique)Same topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207