THE TALE OF SOULMATES OR A MARRIAGE OF CONVENIENCE? TYING THE KNOT OF HUMAN RIGHTS WITH DEVELOPMENT AND ITS GOALS THROUGH DONOR PROGRAMS AND PROJECTS. THE CASE OF THE CANADIAN INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT AGENCY (CIDA)
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
The purpose of the dissertation was to examine whether globally agreed development goals (Millennium Development Goals (MDGs), with a specific focus on poverty reduction) were operationalized in human rights, access to justice and rule of law programs/projects of Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) and of its executing partners. The analysis of the CIDA’s reports to Parliament and programing documents indicates that from the first years of the launch of MDGs, they were operationalized within the CIDA’s programing architecture and remained as a macro- level goal of the agency. MDGs, with the focus on poverty reduction, were treated as an ultimate goal, towards which the issues within the democratic governance portfolio were also geared. Though CIDA acknowledged that human rights were not explicitly mentioned in MDGs, in its programming documents CIDA continuously linked MDGs with human rights considerations. CIDA’s programing also envisioned the achievement of poverty reduction through activities which focused on human rights, rule of law, legal and judicial system.\nDespite the fact MDGs were declared as the overarching aim of CIDA’s efforts, documents of the analyzed CIDA funded projects did not reference MDGs within their projects’ architectures. Neither projects’ goals nor outcomes indicated that they were explicitly contributing to reaching MDGs. While not explicitly referring to MDGs, some projects stated their intent to contribute to poverty reduction and/or assistance to the poor and marginalized. Even though these projects were concerned with poverty reduction and/or interest of the poor and vulnerable groups, the silence towards the MGDs can be interpreted as a gap between the CIDA’s corporate declared development agenda and goals of the projects implemented in the field.\nThe conclusions are based on the analysis of Government of Canada policy papers, CIDA’s official policy and strategy papers on democratic governance, human rights, poverty reduction and sustainable development, and CIDA’s reports to Parliament. As a part of the data collection, interviews were conducted with CIDA’s current and former staff, as well as professionals who worked for organizations which implemented CIDA financed projects. Documents analyzed in the dissertation projects were obtained through access to information requests.
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.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».