Bibliographic record
Abstract
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. …
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".