Global Dissipation of Neoliberal Models and the Sovereign State Doctrine
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article examines the mechanisms of quasi-voluntary and coercive dissemination of neoliberal models of development at the global level through the targeted activities and agendas of international organizations. At present, the legitimacy of both the process of promoting global neoliberalism itself and its results appear contradictory and widely challenged. This process has been accompanied by a decades-long erosion of state sovereignty, mandates and powers of nation-states. The result has been a “vacuum” in their ability to fully implement the sovereign state doctrine. However, today, with a multipolar world order transit states are again claiming the need to implement sovereign approaches to their own development, actively forming strategies and operational development plans alternative to neoliberalism. The author extensively analyzes neoliberal models of intervention, as well as those spheres in which there has been the greatest weakening of state powers. The article puts forward the thesis of the necessity for states to formulate national independent models of development alternative to the neoliberal programs globally imposed. This involves providing a broad ideological and philosophical framework and understanding of sovereign development for restoring the nation-sates ability to formulate sovereign state doctrine, vision, and strategy. In order to design and implement operational plans to revitalize the functional capacities of nation-states, it is important to restore relevant knowledge and practical skills, platforms and tools. It seems that this is what will allow nation-states to formulate their own development strategies in the context of dynamically emerging multipolarity. The article puts special emphasis on the doctrine of a sovereign state in the sphere of the economy. However, a similar approach can and should be applied in related spheres of social and political development.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".