Peace and conflict: Alternative strategies of governance and conflict resolution
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
Abstract This article examines the present discourse of conflict resolution and offers an alternative framework for analyzing the generic sources of conflict at the community, state, and interstate levels. In particular, we argue that although peace is a universal value, there are no universally best strategies to achieve it. This, however, does not mean that the path to peace is fundamentally different in every context. We claim that stable democratic political structures in general lead to peace both in the international and the domestic realms. As such, democratization does lead to peace, but the paths to stable democracy are context sensitive. Therefore, the success of efforts aimed at creating long‐term peace, both among and within nations, depends on the extent to which, democratization incorporates the norms and values of the societies in question. The article begins with a brief overview of some of the problems associated with defining peace. We suggest that peace should be looked at as a universal value, as democracy has been in the recent past. We provide a more detailed theoretical assessment of the linkage between democracy and peace. Our general argument is illustrated in the South Asian, specifically the Indian, context.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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