Shell–NGO Partnership and Peace in Nigeria: Critical Insights and Implications
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
The recent efforts to better understand how businesses can contribute to peace in conflict zones suggest that partnerships can be an effective vehicle for corporate peacebuilding. However, empirical analyses of how partnerships contribute to peace remain limited. Drawing on the differences among cultural, structural, and direct violence, this article examines the extent to which the partnership between Shell and a group of NGOs contributes to peace in the Niger Delta region. Based on qualitative data, the article shows that the partnership contributes to conditions that might ameliorate cultural sources of violence, but not structural causes of direct violence. Hence, business–NGO partnerships are likely more suitable for conflict prevention rather than conflict resolution. The implication is that while partnership might be a useful corporate peacebuilding strategy, it is not necessarily a panacea. The article identifies areas of future research that can strengthen the emerging field of business and peace.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 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