Analyzing if and how international organizations contribute to the sustainable development goals: Combining power and behavior
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
Summary Can International Organizations (IOs) such as the World Bank, United Nations, and International Labor Organization contribute to the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)? This article argues that this is best analyzed by simultaneously considering two sets of factors: the international political constraints external to IOs and the organizational processes and structures internal to IOs. More specifically, this article suggests that such analyses can take place by combining scholarship on International Relations (IR) and Organizational Behavior (OB). The article defines international power, outlines various constraints on IO autonomy, and suggests that OB and IR are well positioned to jointly improve the study of IO employment practices, organizational structures, bureaucratic politics, and inter‐organizational effects. The core aim is to provide justification and material for combining IR and OB in further research on IOs.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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