Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper examines different and competing understandings of human and stresses the task of reconciling these differences as an important challenge for the advocates of this emerging global norm. It argues that human is a distinctive notion with strong regional roots for Asian governments, which could provide the foundation for promoting collective human agenda. While the paper focuses on the perceived tensions between its two salient aspects: from fear (more favored in the West) and from (more favored in Asia), it also points out the scholastic challenge in identifying a common conceptual ground. Freedom from fear is depicted as the Canadian formulation, which views human as of the people, centering on the human costs of violent conflict whereas from want, a different understanding of human developed by Japan, views human as a way of further protecting the and rights of each person to ensure the survival and dignity of individuals as human beings in conflict situations. The author notes on several obstacles to the promotion of human in the Asian Pacific region. On the misgiving that human is a Western political agenda, the author stresses that debates about human do not fall within an East-West fault-line, and that there are also significant differences over its meaning within each camp. It refutes the view that human is a Western concept, and identifies the Asian contributions to the development of the idea in both its respects. At the same time, the paper argues that human is not simply new wine in old bottle. It represents a significant broadening of the notion of comprehensive which privileged regime security. It also departs from the idea of cooperative security which did not address the possible tension between individual and state security. In discussing the third barrier to human in its political (freedom from fear) aspects, the paper examines the difficulties in linking human with humanitarian intervention, whether hard or soft, given concerns about state sovereignty. The pursuit of human security, through regional collective action would undermine state sovereignty and the doctrine of non-interference, which remains the guiding principle of international relations in the Asia-Pacific region. The paper concludes by highlighting the futility of pursuing human as freedom from want in the absence of freedom from fear, and pleads for scholars and policy-makers to view the two understandings of human as being complimentary and mutually-reinforcing. Promoting human through a need-based approach does not negate the case for pursuing human as freedom from fear, and a way of reducing the costs of violent conflict, especially in regions such as the Asia Pacific where the danger of conflict, both internal and inter-state, remains very, very real.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.065 | 0.034 |
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".