MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1131989687

Living in Limbo with Hope: Sudanese Refugees and Social Injustice in Egypt

2015· article· en· W1131989687 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Teresa A. Booker

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Pan-African Studies · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRefugeeInjusticeContext (archaeology)SociologyEconomic JusticeCriminologyGender studiesLawMedia studiesPolitical scienceHistory
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Adam, Gamal A. Living in Limbo with Hope: Sudanese Refugees and Social Injustice in Egypt. Vernon, B.C. Canada: J. Charlton Publishing Ltd., 2014, ISBN: 978-09919441-3-2, pp.232; reviewed by Teresa A. Booker (tbooker@jjay.cuny.edu), Assistant Professor, Department of Africana Studies, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York.One need not look further than the nightly news to see waves of African immigrants risking life and limb for the safety of European shores. Men, women, and children are plucked from sinking boats and guided to dry land where they huddle, at least for a while, in foil blankets waiting to be processed at some intake center where they can plea for crossing an international border into safety are steps away from a new life, Gamal Adam's Living in Limbo with Hope: Sudanese Refugees and Social Injustice in Egypt will be an eye opener.Dr. Gamal Adam-himself a Darfurian and former refugee-turned doctorate-earning, social anthropologist-uses his position as an insider to draw attention to the plight of Sudanese refugees living a life of limbo in Cairo, Egypt. Field notes collected during August 2003-June 2004 as both an observer of everyday activities from weddings to parties to prayers and snowball sampler interviewing people and groups as fate led him to them make a compelling argument for the need to expose the unfortunate treatment of people.Before explaining the current conditions of Sudanese refugees in Egypt, Adam first provides some historical context to the relationship between African refugees and the African countries that neighbor their native land. For example, prior to the mid-1970s, East African nations like Egypt were very generous towards refugees [but] the generosity gradually disappeared as the numbers grew. When the al-Bashir took control over Sudan by means of a coup (and allowed the scorched earth campaign that caused Darfurians to flee), Adams says that the Egyptian government was the first to recognize the new Sudanese government rather than condemn it.Moreover, despite ratifying conventions meant to protect the rights of refugees and ostensibly extending those rights to domestic policy, there is considerable discrepancy between the Egyptian government's affirmations that they have always welcomed refugees with open arms since the days of Joseph and his brethren, and assurances that the Koran specifically enjoins Muslims to enter Egypt with confidence, and what they have actually delivered in terms of providing political asylum to the Sudanese. (p. 63)Adam next explains that the granting of refugee status to Sudanese is based on both macro- and micro- factors. On the macro level, for example, the UNHCR convinced Egypt to temporarily halt for 18 months the arrest and deportation of asylum-seekers just beginning the petition process. However, not only did the Egyptian government ignore the yellow card system for temporary refugees agreed upon with UNCHR, but it disregarded, as well, the blue card system the government itself had already put in place to identify individuals whose completed petitions were already awaiting review phase prior to the UNHCR's intervention. On the micro level, Adam explains how the determination of refugee status is based on a refugee's persuasiveness in presenting their case to interviewing officials as well as the official's degree of familiarity with the situation in the refugee's country of origin. Due to red tape and political bias, asylum-seekers in Cairo waited, on average, 9 months only to be denied asylum in the end.The only topic upon which the UNHCR and the Egyptian government both agree is that refugees should be forced to stay in one camp or location (p.20). Not only does it make them easier to numerate, but it minimizes the hostile actions frequently directed towards immigrants, who are often accused of taking jobs away from the host country citizens, the Egyptians. Adam does not make clear how and under what conditions individuals were allowed exit the designated spaces and enter into Cairo proper. …

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.307 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations1
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Pan-African StudiesSame topicGlobal Peace and Security DynamicsFrench-language works237,207