MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3211587453 · doi:10.1177/03058298211050956

Renewing Relationships? Solitudes, Decolonisation, and Feminist International Policy

2021· article· en· W3211587453 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueMillennium Journal of International Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousUnderpinningDecolonizationGovernment (linguistics)SociologyCorporate governanceGender studiesPolitical sciencePublic administrationLawPoliticsManagement

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article we seek to understand how gendered coloniality is re-affirmed and reproduced. It does so by analysing the inter-national relationships formalised through two recent policy initiatives by the Government of Canada: its Feminist International Assistance Policy and ongoing bilateral mechanisms with Indigenous peoples organisations. Using feminist discourse analysis, we argue that the logics underpinning these initiatives are treated as mutually exclusive, with the result being solitudes across policy areas – Indigenous reconciliation and feminist governance – that should instead overlap. Our analysis suggests that in addition to failing to address systemic marginalisation, establishing exclusive domains of feminist and reconciliation policy reproduces gendered coloniality through the building of inter-national relationships. Ultimately, this results in a failure of both policy initiatives.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score0.551

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.096
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it