Reflections on the UNCRC’s Future from a Transdisciplinary Bricoleur
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The paper argues two main points. First, there remain vast untapped potentials for implementing children’s rights within both present and coming generations, and second, that transdisciplinary theorising and local application can create and exploit such new opportunities. The paper begins with a theoretical analysis of the cross-cutting nature of the UNCRC, and its continued civilising impact as part of the globalised ‘rights revolutions’ reported by controversial Harvard psychologist Steven Pinker (2011: 378-481). I then move to a methodological reflection on how the treaty might be applied as a bricoleur in the lived experiences of children, families, caregivers and communities. The final section outlines a case study from the grape and wine industry located within the Niagara Region of Canada that applied these theoretical and methodological resources as a form of critical praxis in the lives of migrant agricultural workers temporarily employed there through the growing season year after year.
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 | 0.021 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.038 | 0.062 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.021 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".