2020 Vision - Visioning the Future of the United Nations Peacebuilding Architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite the overwhelming impact of major global crises, the actual number of conflicts has been reduced significantly since the end of the cold war.At the same time too many post-conflict countries either fall back into violence or fail to get on the path to sustainable peace.More is now understood about the link between global security and the lack of economic and social investment.This combination of analyses has provided the impetus behind the development of peacebuilding as a field in its own right and the creation of new international architecture.The Peacebuilding Architecture was launched following the UN World Summit, 2005.Its main goal is to bring increased strategy, resources and coherence to political, peacekeeping, development, humanitarian and human rights activities designed to keep countries on a sustainable road to peace.To move forward the PBA must develop a more aggressive approach as follows: be more proactive in its relations with the Security Council, particularly in building understanding of the fundamental link between security and development; implement its mandate to mobilize predictable resources for peacebuilding; take a longer view of peacebuilding which encompasses all aspects of the spectrum of peace activities, including peacemaking and preventive development investment in fragile states; seek to become the focal point in a global system defining and supporting peacebuilding policy, research and applied techniques; support the creation of UN mandated integrated peacebuilding missions, raising resources and bringing all the operational actors to the table in a supportive and coherent manner.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.028 | 0.006 |
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".