MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2600305757 · doi:10.1080/02255189.2017.1289079

L’approche fondée sur les droits en développement : généalogie et état de la question

2017· article· fr· W2600305757 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Benoît Décary-Secours

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développement · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHuman Rights and Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

RÉSUMÉLes principaux acteurs du développement font aujourd’hui la promotion active d’une approche fondée sur les droits des populations ciblées. Or, dans quelle mesure ce paradigme permet-il de repenser le développement? Un regard généalogique sur l’insertion du langage des droits dans le champ du développement nous permet de retracer deux grandes conceptions contradictoires du droit (émancipatrice et conservatrice). En effet, le postulat d’égalité que contient l’énoncé des droits humains n’est pas sans implications politiques : il laisse place à un langage, à des catégorisations et des modes de fonctionnements qui contribuent à la permanence de relations de pouvoir inégalitaires dans l’univers du développement.

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)0.012
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0120.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.319
Teacher spread0.230 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Development Studies/Revue canadienne d études du développementSame topicHuman Rights and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207