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
To understand empowerment, I argue, we need to situate it in a context of the growing impact of economic globalization on groups, communities, countries, and the people in them. I begin by using feminist and postcolonial insights on relations of power at local and global levels to sketch the central concepts of empowerment, advocacy, and globalization. I then use these insights to examine the World Bank's recent work on empowerment. While the World Bank is alert to the complexity of empowerment processes, it ignores the ways in which the local is increasingly being reshaped by features of economic globalization. This lack can be explained by the World Bank's role in the global context, one that assumes that economic globalization can alleviate the disempowerment of “poor people in poor countries”. This position undercuts its claims to advocate for the poor. Its role as advocate is problematic because it fails to attend to relationships at the global level, including relationships it develops with poor people and Third World countries. To give substance to this critique, I discuss work being done by SATUNAMA, a non-profit, non-political organization that advocates for and works to empower people in different regions and sectors of Indonesia.
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 | 0.004 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it