MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314063307 · doi:10.1177/0896920512437053

Beyond Good Intentions: The Structural Limitations of NGOs in Haiti

2012· article· en· W2314063307 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Sociology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimacyPovertyGoodwillPolitical scienceInterimState (computer science)Political economyEconomic growthPublic administrationPrivate sectorSociologyDevelopment economicsLawBusinessEconomicsPoliticsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The catastrophic earthquake which devastated Haiti on 12 January 2010 revealed the deep socio-economic divides which plague the nation. The vivid scenes of trauma led to a massive influx of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) on behalf of the goodwill of the global community. However, more than one year later the reconstruction process has been shown to be a very lucrative undertaking for many private organizations. Haiti remains in ruins, with NGOs benefiting from the extreme privatization of the Haitian state, resulting in a patchwork system of services which are unaccountable to the Haitian people. The Interim Haiti Reconstruction Committee, led by Bill Clinton, seeks to entrench the same neoliberal policies which laid the foundation for much of the pre-earthquake poverty and dependency. Such efforts raise serious questions about the legitimacy of the current reconstruction and whether these organizations are committed to help Haiti, or themselves – and what alternatives exist.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.308
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.091
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it