MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2800309184 · doi:10.3917/rfas.181.0063

Politique nationale de protection sociale du Burkina Faso : contexte d’émergence et stratégies des acteurs

2018· article· fr· W2800309184 on OpenAlexaff
Kadidiatou Kadio, Christian Dagenais, Valéry Ridde

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue française des affaires sociales · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealthcare Systems and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Afin de fournir une protection sociale aux populations, le Burkina Faso a adopté, en 2012, sa première Politique nationale de la protection sociale (PNPS) qui intègre les deux volets de la protection sociale (assurances sociales et filets sociaux). S’appuyant sur la théorie des courants de Kingdon (2003), cet article montre que la PNPS vise à répondre au problème du déficit de protection sociale, source du renforcement des inégalités sociales, et de la dégradation du climat social et politique. Le contexte mondial de promotion d’un socle de protection sociale (nouvelle orientation politique) a renforcé la réceptivité du gouvernement à l’élaboration d’une PNPS, en réponse au déficit de protection sociale. Les institutions internationales, sous l’impulsion de l’UNICEF, se sont regroupées en un réseau d’entrepreneurs politiques pour promouvoir cette solution qui cadre avec leur mandat, et véhiculer des idées de protection sociale qui coïncident avec les attentes et les besoins du moment du gouvernement burkinabé (la solidarité nationale, la paix et la cohésion sociale). L’adoption de la PNPS représente les fondations d’un système de protection sociale pour le pays.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.753
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.145
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations6
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue française des affaires socialesSame topicHealthcare Systems and PracticesFrench-language works237,207