Unequal Interdependency: Chinese Petty Entrepreneurs and Zimbabwean Migrant Labourers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exploring the cultural politics of diasporic entrepreneurs and migrant labourers through an examination of Chinese restaurants in Johannesburg, this article presents what I call the “intra-migrant economy” amid everyday racialized insecurities in urban South Africa. I use the term “intra-migrant economy” to refer to the employment of one group of migrants (Zimbabwean migrant workers) by another group of migrants (Chinese petty capitalists) as an economic strategy outside the mainstream labour market. These two groups of migrants work in the same industry, live in the same city, and have established a sort of unequal employment relation that can be hierarchical and interdependentat once. Chinese migrants are socially marginalized but not economically underprivileged, which stands in contrast to Zimbabwean migrants, who remain economically underprivileged even though they speak local languages. Their different socioeconomic positions in South Africa are profoundly influenced by their nationality and racialization. Thisanalysis of their interdependency focuses on the economic and political structures that shaped the underlying conditions that brought Chinese and Zimbabwean migrants to work together in South Africa.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".