MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2921729757 · doi:10.5334/sta.668

Second-Generation SSR or Unending Violence in Haiti?

2019· article· en· W2921729757 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Stephen Baranyi

Bibliographic record

VenueStability International Journal of Security and Development · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPeacebuilding and International Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamPolitical economyPolitical violenceConstruct (python library)PoliticsSociologyContext (archaeology)Political scienceLaw and economicsLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the literature on security sector reform (SSR), there is a debate between mainstream analysts of post-9/11 approaches, who argue that second-generation SSR (2GSSR) is emerging in some contexts, and post-colonial critics, who argue that despite discursive changes, Western-driven, securitized practices still dominate. This article bridges those views, building on Larzillière’s (2016) idea that the diffusion of global power offers southern actors room for maneuver to construct alternatives to first-generation SSR. Grounding the debate in the Haitian case, the paper explores the mixed record of police and rule of law reform in that relatively permissive environment. It concludes that while some stakeholders have used Haiti’s margin for maneuver to advance 2GSSR, powerful actors are privileging narrow security goals in a political and socioeconomic context that greatly constrains the consolidation of a new approach. The article concludes by situating the uncertain gains that have been made in Haiti in comparative thinking about the uneven prospects for 2GSSR in diverse fragile and conflict-affected states (FCAS).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations21
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStability International Journal of Security and DevelopmentSame topicPeacebuilding and International SecurityFrench-language works237,207