MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W1484593445

Women and Wars: Contested Histories, Uncertain Futures

2013· article· en· W1484593445 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

aboutLe titre ou le résumé porte un signal canadien du lexique géographique.
no affAucune affiliation canadienne : ce travail est invisible pour une base fondée sur la seule affiliation.
Aucune affiliation canadienne. Une base fondée sur la seule affiliation (le devis habituel) n'aurait jamais vu ce travail. C'est l'un des travaux qui justifient l'inversion de la base.

Notice bibliographique

Revuenon disponible
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueGender, Security, and Conflict
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésPolityRefugeeFutures contractPoliticsGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceSociologyLawGender studiesPublic administration
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Women and Wars: Contested Histories, Uncertain Futures By Carol Cohn Polity, Cambridge, UK, 2012 256 pp., $26.95 ISBN-13: 978-0745642451REVIEWED BY KRISTEN A. CORDELLCarol Cohn's December 2012 anthology Women and Wars uses descriptions of the varied roles of during conflict to push forward an agenda for full inclusion of their perspective in securing the peace. Women and Wars fills the vacuum left by the women as victims approach that characterized the early 2000's, with a diverse array of options for understanding the roles and perspectives that have during conflict, including: soldiers, civilians, caregivers, sex workers, refugees and internally displaced persons, anti-war activists, and community peacebuilders.Over the last two years the expansion of information on women, peace, and security has been vast both within academia and policy circles. The space once characterized by awkward silences,1 between feminist researchers and security practitioners is closing rapidly - assisted by an improved understanding of why matters during conflict and post conflict. During the preparation of the 2011 U.S. National Action Plan on Women, Peace and Security, the U.S. government reached out to a consortium of civil society groups and academics, of which the author was a member. They were looking for proof (both empirical and anecdotal) that matters in stability operations, and data to show that women's equality is foundational to stability and security. Cohn's book is an excellent example of such proof. It is a series of well tested, field based examples of why matters during and after war.As founding director of the Consortium on Gender, Security and Human Rights, Cohn's access and professional history have led to a book the strengths of which lie firstly in its diversity of subjects (the roles of in war), and, secondly, in its' diversity of effort (the chapter authors). An introductory chapter provides context and concepts, setting the stage for an inclusive understanding of peace and security. Individual chapters within the book are authored by well-known scholars and practitioners, regularly relying on real life examples of impacts and outcomes. Chapters are organized thematically and cover such issues as security sector reform, disarmament, sexual and based violence, returnee and refugee issues. As a result, the traditional lens through which womens' participation in conflict has been seen for so long, that of victimhood, erodes with each compelling and wellwritten chapter.Research has proven that the inclusion of earlier in the process of peace building and peacekeeping leads to greater security for the state as a whole.2 We also know that parity plays a strong role in state stability. A 2005 study funded by the Canadian government assessing what factors make fragile states more so, concluded that gender parity may play a strong and measurable role in the stability of the state3 even when separated from other known correlations. In other words, it showed that it is not just a matter of more developed societies being more stable, and more developed societies also being societies marked by greater equity, but rather that equity may well increase stability.4 Inequitable societies (i.e. societies in which a portion of the population, principally and/or ethnic minorities, are oppressed) show a much higher propensity to solve their international disputes by initiating violence and war.5 Countries with a lower level of equality are more likely to engage in violence, international crises, and disputes.6Transversely, research shows, as do many failed nation building experiments, that leaving out of rebuilding and renegotiating in the post conflict space has dramatically harmful impacts on the direction of society by reducing stability and prosperity.7 In other words, inclusivity begets stability. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCharge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,741
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0020,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,032
Tête enseignante GPT0,271
Écart entre enseignants0,239 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

En bref

Citations110
Publié2013
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même sujetGender, Security, and ConflictTravaux en français237 207