MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894617405 · doi:10.1080/14442213.2018.1530294

Labour Formalisation as Selective Hegemony in Reform-era Myanmar

2018· article· en· W2894617405 on OpenAlexaff
Stephen Campbell

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Asia Pacific Journal of Anthropology · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Geopolitics and Ethnography
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersUniversitetet i Bergen
KeywordsHegemonyFormalityRule of lawNormativeState (computer science)DemocracyNarrativeSociologyTransition (genetics)DemocratizationEthnographyLabour lawPolitical scienceLaw and economicsLawPolitical economyPoliticsLinguisticsPhilosophyAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the general elections of November 2010, state rule in Myanmar entered a process widely seen as a transition—if stalled—to democracy and rule of law. Such transition narratives have posited normative rule of law and arbitrary rule outside law as opposing logics, and opposing practices. A similar dichotomy is found in studies of labour informalisation in the global South, where informal labour is understood as antithetical to legally protected employment. Arguing otherwise, this article employs interview and ethnographic data to pursue an anthropology of state formation as a means of reading formality and informality as complementary, rather than conflicting, logics of state practice. Drawing on Gavin Smith's notion of selective hegemony, I hold that state actors in Myanmar have pursued varied projects of rule over a heterogeneous landscape of labour relations. In this respect, rule of law is always selective, and informality exhibits not so much an absence of state rule as an indirect modality of rule.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.496
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.315 · 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations9
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Asia Pacific Journal of AnthropologySame topicAsian Geopolitics and EthnographyFrench-language works237,207