Time, space and care: Rethinking transnational care from a temporal perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Against the background of unprecedented international migration, it is not clear how people’s transnational mobility and ties have intersected with the temporalities associated with places or spaces. Drawing on the data from an empirical study of the caregiving experiences of Chinese grandparents in Canada, this case study reveals the simultaneous, yet uneven, temporal impacts of transnational care on individual, familial, and transnational levels. Although the coexistence of multiple temporalities enables Chinese skilled immigrant families to mobilize care resources across generations and nation-states, the dominance of the neoliberal temporal framework also means various consequences of such transnational ‘flexibility’. I argue that rethinking transnational care from a temporal perspective helps us identify the linkages, discrepancies and contradictions between ‘global time’ and peripheral temporalities and between time and space, and thus makes visible the inequalities – in particular, the temporal inequalities – embedded in human migration and social relations on a transnational scale.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".