MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1493441134

Obiora Chinedu Okafor, Legitimizing Human Right NGOs: Lessons from Nigeria

2007· article· en· W1493441134 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Joel M. Ngugi

Bibliographic record

VenueFordham international law journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceDevelopment economicsEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Professor Obiora Chinedu Okafor of Osgoode Hall School of Law, Toronto, Canada, has written a well-researched and valuable book about Human Rights Non-Governmental Organizations ("NGOs") in Nigeria. ... " Similarly, in many countries, NGOs, in their capacity as civic society, have been given official roles in some key governance institutions such as in Nigerian National Human Rights Commissions, media watchdogs, Governmental Commissions, and so forth. In chapter five of the book, Professor Okafor candidly describes the funding patterns of human rights NGOs in Nigeria. As Professor Okafor tells the story, the trail of the "popular legitimization crisis" of local human rights NGOs clearly begins with the vexing issue of foreign funding. This confirms Professor Mutua's earlier admonitions on the role of foreign funding in human rights activism in the African continent: What Professor Okafor brilliantly demonstrates from his empirical work is the dire outcomes of this legitimization crisis--consequences on the efficacy of these human rights NGOs that should make every human rights activist pause. Because of the form of external funding, and due to the absence of competing opportunities with more substantial rewards in other sectors, including the governmental sector, starting and attracting funding for NGOs in most African states is an extremely lucrative form of gainful employment.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFordham international law journalSame topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207