Peaceful Economies: Assessing the Role of the Private Sector in Conflict Prevention in Pakistan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pakistan today seems to be embroiled in a number of conflicts that have both domestic as well as international dimensions. Conflicts of course vary, ranging from household disputes to increasing crime resulting from disparities. However, at an aggregated level, conflicts have a societal connotation that reflects deep-rooted divisions within a society. On a macro-level, these conflicts suppress a country’s potential and inhibit future prosperity. Hence, investor confidence has declined in Pakistan as have market opportunities. The poor law and order situation in Karachi over the last few years, for example, has significantly affected the income of daily wage earners, while investors have taken a back seat. Moreover, entrepreneurial activity becomes even more difficult to pursue for those with less capital or access to financing. With the rise in conflicts across the country coupled with a bleak economic situation, communities and businesses have suffered alike. Economic disparities often breed sustained conflicts. In this context, what is needed in Pakistan is an economic environment that engenders strategic peace. The two are complementing factors, and neglecting either can seriously undermine the effectiveness of measures taken for the other. This research study, conducted by Sustainable Development Policy Institute (SDPI) in 2013, undertook an analysis of the private sector’s role in achieving sustainable peace in Pakistan. It is important to note that as far as sustainable peace is concerned, the private sector is just one of many actors. In that, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) initiatives by businesses can certainly play an important role. Their main contribution, however, can be to influence public policy in favor of strategic peace across the country. While approaches such as dispute resolution (formal and informal) and CSR are important in terms of conflict mitigation, long-term peace is contingent upon a just and equitable system of economic governance.
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".