(Re)Negotiating Existence: Pan-Africanism and the Role of African Union in a Changing Global Order
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The continued relevance of Pan-Africanism is rooted in the continuity of the domestic and global forces that propelled its emergence almost two centuries ago. Far from being over, racial capitalism and neoimperial forces and conditions continue to define the global capitalist order in an even more virulent form through neoliberal globalization. The increasing securitization of Africa through building of military bases by old and emerging global powers is one main evidence of coloniality of power. The expectations of early Pan-Africanists that a just and equitable global order can be forged, which recognizes and respects global diversity and ensures complementary development, have remained largely elusive. This paper examines the above issues in the context of a changing global order, in which Africa continues to occupy a peripheral position. The overarching questions are as follows: What is the relevance of Pan-Africanism in contemporary times? In view of the ongoing reforms at the African Union, how can the organization foster a new form of Pan-Africanism that can lead to the repositioning of Africa in global affairs? These questions will be analyzed using Pan-Africanism as a theoretical framework, historicism, and archival data from the African Union as well as data from secondary sources. The paper concludes that Pan-Africanism and a reformed African Union can help reposition Africa to contribute to the remaking of the international order in ways that are inclusive, humane, and mutually beneficial.
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 | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".