Gender, Conflict and Peace-Building in Africa: A Comparative Historical Review of Zulu and Igbo Women in Crisis Management
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The male gender has often dominated the quest for societal security. Analysis and studies on security management and peace-building tend to advance the role of the male folk more than their female counterparts. This study traced the role of historic Zulu women in societal security management and compared it to the Aba Women's War that is popularly referred to as the Aba women riot. The study used the African developmental feminism theory to anchor its analysis. It maintained that these women rose at critical times to challenge the forces that planted insecurity in their societies. It found that they engaged in both strategic and reactive peace-building. The study also reveals the similarities and differences in Zulu and Igbo women intervention in conflict and security management. Finally, the researchers recommended considering the widespread nature of insecurity in many remote parts of Africa that have consistently led to the death of women and children. There should be a re-awakening of female security regiments in many African societies, and they should be trained to secure their lives and properties through community policing efforts.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".