The Eastern Nile River Waterscape: The Role of Power in Policy-making and Shaping National Narratives
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
This article examines the role of power interchanges in hindering collaborative efforts over shared water resources in the Eastern Nile River. We track the formative process of riparian countries’ narratives, showing how they problematize the watershed differently in accordance with the typology of power dimensions laid out under a proposed framework called Power on Water to Water Policy ( pwwp ). The framework presented attempts to give: (i) a power analysis of the riparian countries’ interactions, and (ii) a prescription of intervention avenues for river basin governance. The use of scientific literature and interviews triangulate data collection to ensure a more accurate analysis. Application of the pwwp framework is shown to contribute an original perspective to watershed management, enabling first, a comprehensive understanding of the Eastern Nile River situation from a power and institutional perspective and second, the identification of elements disrupting effective implementation of water resources management in the watershed.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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