RE-CONCEIVING REFUGEE SITUATIONS FROM A DEVELOPMENT PERSPECTIVE. PROVIDING DURABLE SOLUTIONS FOR REFUGEES THROUGH DEVELOPMENT
Bibliographic record
Abstract
!is paper examines the changing character of forced displacement and its impact on the lives of refugees and their host countries. !e paper proposes the need to re-conceptualize the issue of refugees from a development perspective, recognizing that the forced displacement resulting in refugee situations is both a product and cause of development (or lack thereof ). Conceiving of refugee situations within a broader development perspective provides a constructive path for the international community to provide truly durable solutions that can expand people’s freedoms, opportunities and capabilities to achieve a fulfilling life and reduce global inequal-ities and instability. !e first section discusses the failure of states to facilitate the three durable solutions in the face of the changing character of refugee movements. !e second section proposes reconceiving refugee situations as a development issue, the need for bridging the humanitarian-development gap, and the need for counteracting the negative discourse surrounding refugees in order to build on the opportunities that refugees present. !e third section provides examples to demon-strate how refugees are creating livelihood solutions for themselves, the contribu-tions they are making to their host societies, and how development-led solutions can help support refugees and better manage the long-term developmental conse-quences of protracted refugee situations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".