Transnational Political Processes and Contention Against the Global Economy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on transnational contention has largely overlooked how global economic negotiations and arrangements shape transnational dissent. In this article I examine how neoliberal economic arrangements structure transnational activism. I first describe neoliberalism as an important facet of economic globalization, and then suggest why neoliberal accords have become lightning rods for protest. I propose that transnational opposition to neoliberalism is supported by the growth of transnational mobilizing structures, as well as by the internationalization of political opportunities. For illustration, I draw upon qualitative research on the tactics of Canadian activists over more than fifteen years of sustained protest against trade and investment accords. I conclude by affirming that the link between international political processes and the rise of transnational social movement organizations and coalitions will mean significant transnational mobilizations in the future. I also caution against drawing premature conclusions about the long-term durability of these transnational alliances. Further research on recent anti-WTO and IMF protests will give a fuller picture of the roles played by these transnational alliances.
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 | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| 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 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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 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".