MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2338431676 · doi:10.1177/0896920515589002

Collaborative Barriers and Cultural Brokers: Competing Conceptions of Gender Equality in Potosí, Bolivia

2015· article· en· W2338431676 on OpenAlexaff
Jenny Cockburn

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Sociology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural Development
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnographyComplementarity (molecular biology)SilenceHuman rightsSociologyPower (physics)Gender studiesGender equalityPolitical scienceEconomic growthLawEconomicsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines barriers to collaborations that arise between Andean farmers and a Bolivian rural development NGO in efforts toward agroecology. Despite their shared concerns, tensions are evident in the power imbalances embedded in these relationships, as well as in the divergent values and meanings assigned to participation and equality, most evident when viewed through the lens of gender. The implications of these tensions extend to how gendered human rights are understood more broadly. Western liberal notions of human rights may conflict with local cultures’ notions of these rights, informed by the organizing principle of gender complementarity. To explore this, ethnographic data on farm women’s participation, issues of decision-making power, and their public voices and silence are brought forth, demonstrating how the NGO is positioned as cultural broker between two different conceptions of equality – that of the farm families and the funding agencies and partners from the Global North.

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.324
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.053
GPT teacher head0.318
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical SociologySame topicAgriculture, Land Use, Rural DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207