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 Scandinavian donor practices in Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) with regards to post-conflict justice activities. BiH has been a laboratory of reconstruction, peace-building and transitional justice processes since the end of the war in 1995. While issues related to rebuilding and developing war-torn societies and their economies have attracted extensive scholarly attention, the question of international aid practices in transitional justice contexts remains widely understudied. Although the influence of nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in reconciliatory transitional justice work has been growing, the relationship between international donors and local NGOs involved in these projects remains very limited. The objective of this study is to explore why this is the case. This research draws on Scandinavian aid practices in BiH – particularly the cases of Norway and Sweden – as Scandinavian countries are considered norm entrepreneurs not only in world politics but also in the field of development. This research relies on over three-dozen in depth interviews (with government representatives, experts, and activists), donor evaluation reports, and media documents. The article discusses the factors contributing to the reluctance of Scandinavian donors to provide financial assistance to local NGOs engaging in restorative justice processes in BiH.
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 | 0.000 | 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