MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2982812128 · doi:10.1080/17449626.2019.1690550

Towards a relevant and sustainable juvenile justice system in Ghana

2019· article· en· W2982812128 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Ame

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Ethics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCriminal Justice and Corrections Analysis
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJuvenileEconomic JusticeSustainable developmentSociologyCriminologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental ethicsLawEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since 2010, there have been series of discussions by stakeholders to revamp Ghana’s current juvenile justice system to make it more relevant and sustainable within Ghana’s domestic context. These efforts led to the adoption of the Justice for Children Policy (J4CP) by cabinet in 2015. Using a qualitative analysis of secondary data, this preliminary paper assesses whether the J4CP enhances Ghana’s quest for a relevant, domesticated, efficient, and sustainable juvenile justice system with Ghana’s socio-cultural context and the SDG standards as the standard of measurement. The paper argues that the J4CP embodies elements of relevance, affordability, accessibility, inclusivity, and sustainability. However, the new policy also faces formidable technical, philosophical, and other resource challenges. Consequently, the paper concludes that the J4CP is only a good first step towards creating a domesticated and relevant juvenile justice system in Ghana.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 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

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global EthicsSame topicCriminal Justice and Corrections AnalysisFrench-language works237,207