MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1982849510 · doi:10.1080/14747730600703053

Governing through empowerment: Oxfam's global reform and trade campaigns

2006· article· en· W1982849510 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

VenueGlobalizations · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGovernmentalityEmpowermentPovertyContext (archaeology)GlobalizationCorporate governanceGovernment (linguistics)Global governancePolitical sciencePublic administrationFair tradeEconomic growthSociologyPolitical economyEconomicsPoliticsLawManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Within the context of globalization and governmentality studies, this essay analyses Oxfam's global reform and trade campaigns as a form of governance. These campaigns are based on advanced liberal programmes of empowerment which aim to shape poverty relations and the conduct of the poor in the ‘developing’ world. Oxfam's campaign to ‘Make Trade Fair’ and its influential report on ‘Rigged rules and double standards’ serve as a basis from which to understand the organization's governing practices, and how these are embedded in the NGO's programme statements and policy documents. Following Barbara Cruikshank's insights on the will to empower, we argue that self-management and self-empowerment have been tirelessly put forward by Oxfam as solutions to poverty which have in turn obscured this organization's means of government.

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 score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score0.836

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)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.281 · 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