IDEAS, INTERESTS, AND INSTITUTIONS: CONCEDING CITIZENSHIP IN BANGLADESH
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For close to forty years, tens of thousands of Urdu speakers in Bangladesh did not exercise their rights as citizens, which they held in law but which were not recognized in practice. The roots of their marginalization were deep, stretching back to Indian independence and the creation of East and West Pakistan in 1947 and specifically to the divisions within Pakistan that existed at that time and were hardened during the Bangladesh struggle for independence in subsequent years. From the creation of the state of Bangladesh in 1971, this community lived in camps and settlements, without a legal identity and the associated rights to be educated, to work, and to participate in public life. The recognition by the government of Bangladesh in 2008 of their right to be registered as citizens was a significant human rights achievement. This essay tells the story behind this remarkable development and, using the framework for analysing the determinants of public choices advanced by Michael Trebilcock, examines the role that ideas, interests, and institutions played in this dramatic reversal of a long-standing public policy.
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 | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.061 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| 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".