MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326738096 · doi:10.1093/jrs/fet043

Human Rights, Migration, and Social Conflict: Toward a Decolonized Global Justice. By Ariadna Estevez.

2013· article· en· W2326738096 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ninna Nyberg Sørensen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Refugee Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGlobal Peace and Security Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHuman rightsCitizenshipConceptualizationGlobalizationPolitical scienceSociologyImmigrationCriminalizationPolitical economyEuropean unionArgument (complex analysis)RacializationLaw and economicsCriminologyDevelopment economicsLawEconomicsPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The main argument presented in Ariadna Estévez’s critical analysis of the causal relationship between globalization, migration, and social conflict is as follows: since failure to respect the universal human rights of immigrants generates conflict in receiving and transit nations, recognizing human rights would be in the best interest of sending, receiving and transit countries alike. Estévez’s analysis is based on a comparison of certain elements of North American (the three NAFTA countries of the USA, Canada and Mexico) and European (European Union and individual member states) immigration policy that result from discrimination against immigrants, in particular the securitization of cooperation for development and borders, the use of temporary detention centres, the toughening of asylum policy, the criminalization of migration and the social marginalization of immigrants. Following Giddens, Estévez argues that conflict is the predictable but not inevitable result of the structuration relationship between globalization and migration. In turn, three main conceptual frameworks underpin her analysis: firstly, De Genova’s conceptualization of illegality as being constituted by legal apparatuses that produce conditions which serve to maintain the vulnerability and control of immigrants rather than as situations inherent to undocumented migration; Coutin’s theory of illegality as a space of nonexistence; and Honneth’s theory of intersubjective recognition. Based on case examples from the North American and European countries included in the analysis, the normative possibilities for the recognition of immigrants are evaluated through the lenses of citizenship and universal human rights. As citizenship includes a historical tendency to exclusion, the normative proposal is based on human rights understood not from a hegemonic or liberal perspective but as part of an intertextual conceptualization. The latter forms the basis for the normative proposal of a decolonized global justice.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0060.012
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.331 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Refugee StudiesSame topicGlobal Peace and Security DynamicsFrench-language works237,207