Norges seier over Canada i konkurransen om en plass i FNs sikkerhetsråd handlet om tillit
Bibliographic record
Abstract
At småstaten Norge vant over stormakten Canada i kampen om en plass i Sikkerhetsrådet, overrasket flere observatører. Denne artikkelen argumenterer for at et tidlig annonsert kandidatur, stabil deltagelse fra høyt politisk hold og fokus på personlige relasjoner mellom landene for å oppnå tillit, var særlige viktige faktorer i 2020-utfallet av valget til Sikkerhetsrådet for Vest-gruppen. Det argumenteres særlig for at disse faktorene bunner i et spørsmål om tillit mellom stater, som til slutt resulterer i om landet stemmer på dem eller ikke. Dette gjør at å oppnå tillit bør anses som en egen logikk i internasjonale kampanjer fremover – både strategisk, for fremtidige kampanjer, og akademisk, med tanke på fremtidige analyser. Datamaterialet er innhentet gjennom dokumentanalyse, feltarbeid og eliteintervjuer av 25 informanter innenfor og utenfor FN. Abstract in English:Norway’s Victory over Canada in the Competition for a Place in the UN Security Council Was About TrustThe surprise victory of the small state of Norway over the major power of Canada in the competition for a seat in the Security Council caught the attention of several observers. This article argues that an early announced candidacy, consistent high-level political engagement, and a focus on building personal relationships between the countries to establish trust were particularly crucial factors in shaping the outcome of the 2020 election for the Western Group’s seat in the Security Council. It is specifically argued that these factors are rooted in a question of trust among states, which ultimately determines whether a country votes for them or not. This highlights the significance of prioritizing trust-building as a distinct logic in future international campaigns – both strategically for upcoming campaigns and academically for future analyses. The data for this study was collected through document analysis, fieldwork, and elite interviews with 25 informants within and outside of the United Nations.
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 | 0.005 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.097 | 0.014 |
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".