Gender Mainstreaming: A Five‐Country Examination
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
Although gender mainstreaming ( GM ) has been the international norm for working toward gender equality in policies and practices since the F ourth W orld C onference on W omen in B eijing 1995, its impact has been uneven. The lack of substantive results has led to debate surrounding GM's capacity for engendering meaningful policy change. This article synthesizes the input of key GM stakeholders (within government, academia, and nongovernmental organizations) across C anada, A ustralia, S weden, the U nited K ingdom, and U kraine. It discusses national approaches to mainstreaming gender, identifies key factors inhibiting and/or promoting GM , and proposes how current strategies can be modified, strengthened and/or replaced by alternative approaches. Central to the analysis is the question as to whether GM in current or expanded versions has the potential to addresses the wide variety of diversities among nation state populations. Related Media . 2013 . “.” http://www.eldis.org/go/topics/resource‐guides/gender/gender‐mainstreaming#.Ud7nzaz9zTo . 2012 . “.” Gender Equality. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/themes/gender‐equality/
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it