Navigating neoliberal networks: Transnational Internet platforms in sport for development and peace
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Internet platforms are increasingly becoming strategic tools for non-governmental organizations (NGOs) involved in international development to collaborate, share information, and gain legitimacy. Drawing on the literature on neoliberalism, sport for development, globalization and networking through communication technologies, this article examines the interpretations of staff working in Canadian and Swiss sport for development and peace (SDP) NGOs on the role of the Platform, while also exploring the challenges and benefits of the Platform for each NGO. Qualitative research methods were utilized, including a content analysis of documents on the Platform and the two NGO websites, along with interviews with staff from both NGOs. The findings revealed, on one hand, that staff for both NGOs were concerned about the Platform’s potential to support collaboration amongst organizations that: a) are frequently in competition with one another – a feature of NGO culture in a neoliberal political environment; and b) commonly adopt divergent approaches to SDP work. On the other hand, both NGOs acknowledged that the Platform and the UN-endorsed International Year of Sport and Physical Education were at times useful for disseminating and legitimizing SDP globally, although the potential of new media technologies has not been realized because of inequalities within and around the NGO community. Implications of the findings along with ideas for future research are discussed.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 |
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".