Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper I aim to provide a critical analysis of how Vancouver Principle (VP) 11 on the Contribution of Women to preventing the recruitment and use of child soldiers addresses gender and women’s involvement in peacekeeping. Critical feminist research on gender and war, the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, and international relations has examined and critiqued the important ways in which gender underlies, informs, and helps give meaning to matters of international peace and security. I draw on this diverse literature to discuss how VP 11 approaches gender and peacekeeping in a way that is at times problematic and at others nuanced and progressive, and provide concrete recommendations for how critical feminist insights can improve the implementation of the Vancouver Principles. The importance of understanding gender dynamics for peacekeeping in general, and for preventing the recruitment and use of children as soldiers in particular, necessitates more nuanced approaches to gender analysis and women’s participation. The implementation of VP 11 can support both of these areas.
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 | 0.041 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.065 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".