MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2994347746 · doi:10.7202/1066090ar

Les bénévoles, artisans institutionnalisés des politiques migratoires locales ?

2019· article· fr· W2994347746 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Louis Bourgois, Marion Lièvre

Bibliographic record

VenueLien social et Politiques · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, Gender
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAgence Nationale de la Recherche
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette contribution met en lumière de nouvelles relations entre État et société civile dans les politiques migratoires locales et, plus particulièrement, dans les politiques d’insertion sociale et économique. À partir d’enquêtes de terrain ethnographiques menées dans trois agglomérations françaises, les auteurs mettent à jour un mouvement d’institutionnalisation progressive de l’action bénévole au sein de l’action publique. Les terrains d’enquête sont des « dispositifs d’insertion » initiés par l’État et confiés à des associations, visant à l’insertion sociale de migrants européens précaires identifiés comme « Roms », vivant en habitat précaire. L’article propose une analyse en deux temps. Un premier temps revient sur le choix des services de l’État de confier à des tiers « opérateurs » la mise en oeuvre de « dispositifs d’insertion », en fixant des orientations notamment en matière de mobilisation de bénévoles. Un second temps concerne les modalités pratiques de cette institutionnalisation du bénévolat dans la réponse publique. L’hypothèse développée en filigrane est celle d’une politique migratoire qui se construit en partie sur des stratégies de canalisation, de mise à distance et d’institutionnalisation d’une action bénévole dépolitisée.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.062

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.157
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations13
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLien social et PolitiquesSame topicMulticulturalism, Politics, Migration, GenderFrench-language works237,207