MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Logic of International Response to Anti-Violence and Sexual Integrity Agenda in Violent Conflict: Case of MINUSCA

2023· article· en· W4362510987 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueVestnik RUDN International Relations · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Security, and Conflict
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersRussian Science Foundation
KeywordsPeacekeepingSexual violenceSanctionsPeacebuildingPolitical scienceCriminologyAction (physics)LawSociologyPublic relationsComputer security

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A survivor-centered approach is at the heart of the international community’s humanitarian action today. In armed conflicts various forms of sexual violence are seen not only as accompanying violence, but also as a tool of pressure and warfare of the contesting parties, and important measures to prevent and counteract such acts have been included into the mandates of the UN peacekeeping missions. This research aims to identify the logic of international community’s action to counter conflict-related sexual violence (CRSV) by strengthening peacekeeping initiatives, and complement ongoing research on the protection of women in armed conflict and situations of sexual violence. This goal entails an examination of all elements of the existing system: legal framework, the role of states, and the activities of the UN. The authors conducted a content analysis of the UN Security Council resolutions on the topic to trace conceptual terminological changes. At the same time, to identify the main contradictions in the rhetoric of states and, consequently, the motives of their actions, a discourse cluster analysis was used based on the statements of delegations in the UN Security Council. The resulting clusters display three unique positions of the national states that are mostly explained by different understandings of the term itself, the categories of victims of such violence, and the relevant tools for countering it. Emphasis could be placed on including sexual violence on the sanctions list, gender education in military training, increasing the number of women in peacekeeping and peacebuilding missions, or preventive measures. The authors identified the most active states pushing the anti-sexual violence agenda; they include Germany, the UK, the US, Canada, and France. The article also examines the practical implementation of UN peacekeeping mandates in terms of including measures to counteract sexual violence. The research confirms that peacekeeping missions are now more actively engaged in the international response to CRSV.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.506
Threshold uncertainty score0.639

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.307 · 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