Federalism, Decentralization, and Reproductive Rights in Argentina and Chile
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
Through a comparison of federal Argentina and unitary Chile, we ask whether federalism explains subnational protections of women's reproductive rights. We explore two factors: policy jurisdictions under decentralization and party system territorialization under federalism. We find that, under decentralization, subunits in both countries enjoy autonomy in funding and delivering health care. Yet, decentralization does not explain why specific subunits comply with national policies while others deviate. We argue that federalism, in allowing party system fragmentation, makes subunit leaders more responsive to local concerns, especially when subunits vary in their principled opposition to or support for contraception. When party systems are centralized, as in unitary states, partisan allegiances better predict patterns of compliance and defiance. Thus, federalism matters for understanding patterns in the subnational variation of policy outcomes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| 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