Advocates, Adversaries, and Anomalies: The Politics of Feminist Spaces in Gender and Development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This article examines the ways that politically minded feminists create and sustain spaces for feminist practice within Canadian development contexts despite institutional, ideological, and economic constraints. This research contributes to a much-needed reassessment of feminist engagement with Gender and Development (GAD), ultimately seeking to determine whether and in what ways GAD can become a political force for progressive social change. The article demonstrates that politically minded feminists are present within mainstream Canadian development organizations and are attempting to push the boundaries of mainstream GAD processes to embrace feminist projects, values, and commitments. However, building allies through connections with women's movements is crucial for feminists to make mainstream development more amenable to feminist goals, values, and principles. RÉSUMÉ L'article examine comment les féministes préoccupées par les questions de politique créent et soutiennent des espaces pour les pratiques féministes dans le milieu du développement au Canada, malgré des contraintes institutionnelles, idéologiques et financières. La recherche en question contribue à la très nécessaire réévaluation de l'engagement féministe par rapport à l'approche genre et développement (GED) en tentant de déterminer duns quelle mesure et de quelle façon cette approche peut devenir une force politique pour un changement social progressiste. Selon l'auteure, des féministes préoccupées par les questions de politique sont déjà présentes dans les organismes généraux de développement au Canada et elles tentent de repousser les limits des processus courants de GED pour adopter des projets, des valeurs et des engagements féministes. Il est toutefois essentiel de construire des alliances avec le mouvement des femmes afin de rendre les pratiques générales de développement plus favorables aux objectifs, aux valeurs et aux principes féministes.
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 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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".