Hanging on to hope in a Mexican migrant shelter: the empowering potential of Albergue Tochán
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper offers a case study of how staying in one Mexico City migrant shelter (albergue) helps refugee claimants from the northern countries of Central America to revise their plans and aspirations in light of the changing reality that has made it more difficult for them to reach the United States. Specifically, we investigate whether Albergue Tochán contains elements of an empowering setting in which claimants can gain some control over their lives as they wait for permission to stay in Mexico. The paper is based on interviews, participant observation and follow-up conversations with ten men, who, at the time of research in 2018–2019, were staying at Albergue Tochán (an all-men’s shelter) while awaiting decisions on their asylum cases. All of the men had intended to migrate to the United States, but, for a variety of reasons, ended their journeys in Mexico City. The paper demonstrates how the stay at Albergue Tochán stabilized the conditions of life for these men, at least temporarily. Through acquiring meaningful roles and relationships during their stay at the shelter, the men were empowered to the extent that they built agency, trust, skills, identity and hope.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".