Governing Practices and Strategic Narratives for Syrian Refugee Returns
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract How do host states attempt to speed up returns of refugees before peacebuilding and the lack of official arrangements with the home state? Building on the conceptual framework, which coalesces governing practices, strategic narratives, and issue linkages, the article explains the early stages of policy formulation and discourses on refugee returns. Empirically, it draws from Turkey’s return initiatives targeting Syrians since 2016. It argues that the Turkish government seeks to advance in (1) practices promoting self-organized voluntary returns of a small number of refugees and (2) the preparation of ground for mass repatriation and resettlement back to Northern Syria. The strategic return narrative has 2-fold target audiences and aims. While keeping the domestic constituency stands as the main motivation by conveying the message of ‘Syrians are returning’, legitimizing unilateral cross-border interventions targets the international audience. The article contributes to the lack of research on the governance of refugee returns by examining the host states’ strategic narrating in relation to the domestic and geopolitical interests.
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.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it