South-South cooperation in health: bringing in theory, politics, history, and social justice
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the mid-2000s, the practice of South-South cooperation in health (SSC) has attracted growing attention among policymakers, health and foreign affairs ministries, global health agencies, and scholars from a range of fields. But the South-South label elucidates little about the actual content of the cooperation and conflates the "where" with the "who, what, how, and why". While there have been some attempts to theorize global health diplomacy and South-South cooperation generally, these efforts do not sufficiently distinguish among the different kinds of practices and political values that fall under the South-South rubric, ranging from economic and geopolitical interests to social justice forms of solidarity. In the spirit of deepening theoretical, historical, and social justice analyses of SSC, this article: (1) critically revisits international relations theories that seek to explain SSC, exploring Marxian and other heterodox theories ignored in the mainstream literature; (2) traces the historical provenance of a variety of forms of SSC; and (3) introduces the concept of social justice-oriented South-South.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.063 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| 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".