MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1605495561

International N.G.O.S Approaches to Institutional Reforms in Nepal

2010· article· en· W1605495561 on OpenAlexaff
Raj K. Khadka

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmpowermentCastePolitical scienceEconomic growthHuman rightsPovertyFocus groupGeneral partnershipAccountabilityPublic administrationSociologyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Poverty, caste and gender inequities continue to challenge the creation of economically and socially just societies in Nepal. In such a context, international non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are emerging as important developmental actors in reforming social institutions such as belief systems, attitudes, and traditions, among others. International NGOs are internationally funded organizations that have been working towards building strong and just communities in Nepal since the 1960s. This study explored the International NGOs approaches to institutional reforms in Nepal. This qualitative study was conducted with ten International NGOs operating in Nepal in the areas of gender and caste equity. The data collected from interview, focus group discussions and secondary research were analyzed in terms of emerging themes and for external validity interpreted from human rights and development theories. The study found that the development emphasis is on the capacity building of women, dalits and their organizations, partnership with local organizations, participatory development and advocacy, social investment, awareness education, and social and economic empowerment. As a result, marginalized groups have been able to unite, organize and advocate for their rights and state accountability. This also reveals that International NGOs are adopting right based approach to development. This paper will look at how International NGOs are undertaking development policies as a way of reforming social institutions in a Himalayan country ridden by a decade-long conflict.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.239 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicHuman Rights and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207