Constituting ‘Problems’ through Policies: A WPR Approach of Policies Governing Teenage Pregnancy in France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the construction of policy problems through the exploration of the theoretical space opened up by the ‘What’s the Problem Represented to be?’ (WPR) approach developed by Bacchi (2009). It proposes a critical analysis of current policies governing teenage pregnancy in France through the deconstruction of the structures that have participated in shaping the ‘problem’ today. Focusing on discursive practices, the analysis unveils the political essence of the knowledge that constitutes the problem of ‘teen pregnancy’, and points to the constant flux characterising it, which is captured and stabilised in policymaking through problematisation. It is argued that these conclusions call for greater self-reflexivity in research and policymaking and prompt critical and feminist researchers to engage with disrupting current policymaking rationality.
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 | 0.023 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.060 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| 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".