Exile within borders : a study of complinace with the international regime to proetct internally displaced persons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The UN Guiding Principles for the Protection of Internally Displaced Persons (GP), introduced before the UN General Assembly in 1998, are the cornerstone of the international regime for the protection of internally displaced persons (IDPs). Much has been written about their unusual and unlikely development, yet very little is known about their effectiveness in altering state behavior towards their displaced populations. This dissertation takes a systematic and global look at patterns of commitment and compliance with the IDP regime and identifies forces that have driven states to comply with them. This dissertation addresses: (1) when and why countries voluntarily bind their sovereignty by instituting the GP into domestic law, and (2) if countries that have instituted the GP into law in fact comply with them. I tackle these questions using mixed methods. First, I present a large-n statistical analysis of all documented cases of displacement in the past twenty years to test the merits of competing theories of norm diffusion. Then I trace the evolution of Colombia’s response to internal displacement from denial of the crisis to deep compliance with the IDP regime. Both the first and second stages of the dissertation find that, above all, regional factors are key to the diffusion of IDP norms. This is evidenced by the clear pattern of regional clustering of commitment found in the statistical analysis and by the significant influence exerted by Latin American regional politics found in Colombia’s evolving response to its displacement crisis. This study should be of particular interest to policy practitioners and activists involved in addressing the problem of internal displacement and protecting the rights of IDPs.
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 | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".