Analysing the Lived Experiences of Undocumented and Unaccompanied Child Migrants from Zimbabwe to South Africa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zimbabwe’s socio-economic crisis post-2000 led to the emergence of new forms of livelihoods. Long- and short-term migration emerged as a survival strategy for over a million Zimbabweans who moved legally and illegally to countries such as South Africa, England, Botswana, Namibia, Canada and Australia. While migration in Zimbabwe has mainly been an adult pursuit, post-2000, there has been an increasing number of unaccompanied child migrants. Zimbabwean unaccompanied child migrants in South Africa provide important insights into how the socio-economic rights of children are central to understanding child migration. This article focuses on the lived experiences of undocumented and unaccompanied child migrants from Zimbabwe living in South Africa. It utilises a desk research approach to analyse how the socio-economic rights of child migrants are experienced in Zimbabwe and South Africa. Both states have failed to meet their national and international obligations to protect child migrants. The article highlights various forms of abuse undocumented child migrants from Zimbabwe experience in South Africa. The article concludes that both local and international law in South Africa fails to provide a balance between the competing interests of child protection and child autonomy.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".