Sport for development and peace: a call for transnational, multi-sited, postcolonial feminist research
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, I reflect upon and discuss findings from an empirical study that employed a postcolonial feminist approach to a multi-sited global ethnography of a sport for development and peace (SDP) initiative. Building on postcolonial feminist perspectives pertaining the importance of creating cross-border feminist solidarities anchored in struggles in the specificities of ‘the local’, in combination with recent work on research on transnational global activist research that explores issues of NGOization, I investigate two key methodological challenges and tensions that emerged in my research, including: (1) the politics and perils of translation in cross-cultural research; and (2) the technologies of aid evaluation and ethics of representation. I conclude by critically considering struggles of power, knowledge and social relations in local and transnational SDP, and discuss possibilities for mutual accountability and ethical responsibility in future SDP research, policy and practice.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.057 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it