MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2101604942 · doi:10.5334/sta.eb

After Marikana: Rethinking Conflict Resolution in Africa: The South African Case

2015· article· en· W2101604942 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Gavin Bradshaw, Richard Haines

Bibliographic record

VenueStability International Journal of Security and Development · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPeace and Human Rights Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConflict resolutionSettlement (finance)InstitutionalisationConflict managementGovernment (linguistics)Political scienceCommissionAuthoritarianismPolitical economySociologyDevelopment economicsEconomic growthPoliticsLawEconomicsDemocracy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper applies the Analytical Conflict Resolution School approach to achieve a deeper understanding of South Africa’s post-apartheid era. It argues that South Africa is an example of ‘protracted social conflict,’ because it displays a fundamental communal aspect, evinces a strong ‘human needs’ element, its pre-settlement condition had resulted in strongly authoritarian government, and it displayed a dependency in its foreign relations. While South Africa transcended traditional conflict resolution methodology with its National Peace Accord and Truth and Reconciliation Commission, neither of these processes was seen through to its end and, as a result, the South African conflict resolution process remains in limbo. This is coupled with a rising internal level of strain expressed in racial tension, violence, migration and economic frustration. A way out of this current malaise is the institutionalization of conflict management through its inclusion in the school curricula, the establishment of conflict management systems to deal with lower-level conflicts, and the building of needs-satisfying institutional arrangements throughout the society, enabling government to be more sensitive to the needs of the people.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.090

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0360.025
Scholarly communication0.0100.008
Open science0.0020.010
Research integrity0.0070.007
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 head0.100
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStability International Journal of Security and DevelopmentSame topicPeace and Human Rights EducationFrench-language works237,207