Mouvance altermondialisation et identité collective des organisations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’émergence de l’altermondialisme et les transformations de la scène militante aux niveaux international et national a eu des conséquences importantes pour plusieurs mouvements sociaux. La création de nouveaux lieux de légitimation des discours et des pratiques permettent aux organisations et aux mouvements de s’inscrire au sein de réseaux plus larges. Toutefois, la conceptualisation de l’altermondialisme, un métissage d’ONG et de mouvements sociaux, reste problématique. Au lieu de proposer une autre tentative de qualification du phénomène à partir de ses manifestations les plus spectaculaires (forums sociaux ou manifestations), cet article propose plutôt l’analyse de sa construction au sein d’une organisation affirmant s’y inscrire. À partir d’une étude de terrain conduite auprès d’une organisation française de commerce équitable, le texte étudie les processus de construction du schème d’interprétation (frame) altermondialiste à partir des dynamiques entre les militants, l’organisation et son environnement. L’étude de cas présentée vise à contribuer à l’exercice de conceptualisation de cette mouvance en étudiant la mouvance altermondialiste comme champ d’interaction plutôt que comme structure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".