Bibliographic record
Abstract
On May 23 rd , 2008, the South American Union of Nations (UNASUR) was created, bringing together all of the South American countries into a single body.This thesis reviews the origins and outcomes to date of that institution.I argue that UNASUR, represents a sort of hybrid institution, trapped between "open regionalism" and "post-neoliberal regionalism."The Latin America governments, and especially their leaders, wanted to move forward to an era of postneoliberal regionalism, with the creation of UNASUR.According to this post-neoliberal vision, the new institution should include the prioritization of the role of the state in economic development, inclusion of a social dimension for regional integration, and promotion of the participation of social actors.The shift toward post-neoliberal regionalism had a strong basis in support among domestic actors and was not just a top-down process of state elites.I thus claim that the perceptions of civil society were crucial for guiding the preferences of the states in relation to decisions to create an alternative regional institution like UNASUR, as well as domestic and regional events that conditioned its creation.Once UNASUR was created, could we say that the post-neoliberal regionalism paradigm is consolidated?The examination of the bodies of UNASUR shows that even though the main principles of UNASUR follow the precepts of post-neo-liberal regionalism, these principles have not been developed in all the councils.The South American Defense Council (SADC) was created in the period between two major crises between member countries.These crises, instead of pushing back the will to integrate, rather strengthened this organ; as discussed below, it is today one of the most developed and effective.COSIPLAN was created in an open regionalism era, and has developed important projects since its creation, today in the hands of UNAUR.However, UNASUR's Economic and Financial Council (CSEF) and the Bank of the South have x List of Abbreviations
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".