MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061832967 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2002.9668867

Gender, Environment and Development in Southern Africa

2002· article· fr· W2061832967 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHydropower, Displacement, Environmental Impact
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeographyPolitical scienceEnvironmental planning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT Using data from research in a Zimbabwean resettlement area, this paper argues that considering the environment enriches gender analysis in Southern Africa. The paper also provides an overview of various feminist approaches to the study of women and the environment in Southern Africa over the past two decades. Ecofeminist approaches are found to be problematic, particularly the theoretical position that women are somehow closer to nature than men are. The paper argues that a feminist political ecology approach that calls for careful consideration of the cultural, ideological and institutional context under study works well to reveal important gendered social dynamics and relations regarding the environment. Finally, through challenging the “crisis narrative” that runs through environmental studies, including feminist political ecology, the paper argues for a new dimension in gender and environment research.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.295
Teacher spread0.205 · 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