Salvation Through Roots and Hybrids? The Governance of Humanitarian Intervention and Aid
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ongoing conflict, political instability, and social consequences of the wars in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) have historically been ignored by the international community. Although seemingly complex, personally observed local solutions to domestic and regional issues are currently providing examples of effective programs which could become blueprints for other communities, regions, and potentially the state. This presentation will provide an overview of the history, current situation, and actions of the United Nations (UN), non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and citizenry in order to challenge perceptions surrounding the ongoing conflict. The first section provides a brief outline of the history of the DRC since independence including: political actions, UN, and external state interventions. The second section will examine the role of NGOs in the country – both theoretically and practically – in order to clarify the challenges NGOs face and how these challenges could be overcome, improving the outcome of aid offered to the people of the DRC. The third section will suggest the potential for grassroots, or “bottomup”, change based on political theory and how such change could be implemented given recent developments in the country. The fourth and final section will discuss recent developments socially and economically in the DRC using recent field research. The presentation will conclude with a critical analysis, propose some potential outcomes of UN actions, and offer recommendations given knowledge gained from academic and field research specific to the Democratic Republic of Congo.
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 | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".