The “Thickening” of the US–Mexico Border: Prospects for Cross-Border Networking and Cooperation
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the effects of national border policy on cooperation and networking among local organizations in the US–Mexico borderlands. Structural and organizational factors are considered in order to build a conceptual model that explains the development of collaborative relations between public and nonpublic entities in a border context. The model explores three research questions. What factors define border organizations' level of engagement in collaborative networks? What determines the resilience of an organization participating in these networks? How does change in national policy toward the border affect cross-border cooperation and networking? Survey data collected from a sample of local organizations in a section of the US–Mexico border region is used to validate the model. Then, it is argue that policies enacted after 9/11 are “thickening” the border by creating new barriers to cooperation and, ultimately, diluting a form of social capital that is important for the region's long-term development. The model provides analytical avenues for future research in this area.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it