Structure from Chaos: The Creation of Libyan Civil Society
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We explore the resources, actors and processes involved in the rapid emergence of civil society in Libya after the fall of a dictator regime. We conceptualize this context as one of institutional chaos, where political oppression suppressed civil society institutions, and the revolution then created an upheaval, a moment of instability and unpredictability. A multi-level process framework emerged from the findings, highlighting the important role of institutional brokers, actors embedded in multiple established institutions and the emerging field. These institutional brokers link actors and also transform ideas from other fields. We found that brokers engaged in a process of creative translation, recombining, transposing, and recasting institutional resources from other fields. However, once the resources were at play in the emerging field, brokers faced resistance, a not-invented-here syndrome. To overcome this barrier, brokers engaged in collaborative transmission, creating spaces to develop shared meanings and practices with grassroots organizations. This research contributes to our understanding of institutional work required in different contexts, and addresses a grand challenge of our time-creation of civil society after extreme political oppression.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".