MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2090309487 · doi:10.1177/0170840605056391

Transnational Institutions in Developing Countries: The Case of Iranian Civil Aviation

2006· article· en· W2090309487 on OpenAlexaff
Michael Carney, Mehdi Farashahi

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganization Studies · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInstitutionalisationCivil aviationAviationCivil societyPolitical sciencePoliticsWork (physics)International relationsPolitical economySociologyLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The proliferation of transnational institutions in the form of protocols, conventions, regimes and standards is a growing influence on organizational practice. Recent work on the origins and impact of transnational institutions focuses upon processes in ‘core’ states, but their influence in developing countries has not received much attention. In this paper we narrate a case study of the diffusion of two institutional regimes represented by the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and the International Air Transport Association (IATA) in Iranian civil aviation. The case study describes a seemingly frictionless and uncontested embedding of the emergent international aviation regime in post-World War II Iran and a severe challenge to those institutions in the years following Iran's Islamic revolution. We characterize the rise and decline of these regimes as a double process of institutionalization and de-institutionalization, and identify political and technical factors that drive institutional change. We discuss several theoretical and policy implications stemming from the experience of transnational aviation institutions in Iran.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.274 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations23
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOrganization StudiesSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207