MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1978017097 · doi:10.1177/00471178030171005

NGOs and the Advancement of Economic and Social Rights: Philosophical and Practical Controversies

2003· article· en· W1978017097 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Relations · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsSocial rightsAmnestyPoliticsPolitical scienceSociologyInternational human rights lawFundamental rightsGlobalizationLaw and economicsContext (archaeology)Law

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores controversies surrounding economic and social rights in the context of recent moves by non-governmental organizations, notably Amnesty International, to strengthen their commitment to these ‘second-generation’ rights. Although this move is long overdue, particularly in an era of increasing economic polarization due to globalization, the article argues that these efforts will fail if we simply attempt to ‘add’ economic and social rights to the existing liberal human rights discourse. This article focuses on the contribution that feminist ethics has made to the reconceptualization of rights in theory and practice. Specifically, it argues that, in order to make sense of both the moral imperative of so-called ‘welfare’ rights, and the political work required to realize them, we must rethink rights in terms of relationships and the patterns of responsibility that emerge out of them.

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 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 categoriesnone
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 score0.745
Threshold uncertainty score0.356

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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.312 · 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