Addressing gender-based violence through social protection: a scoping review
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Development practitioners are searching for novel ways to address gender-based violence (GBV) in the wake of what the UN Secretary General termed a "shadow pandemic" of violence against women (VAW).Social protection systems, which are oriented towards preventing poverty and improving quality of life, contain a wide range of policy tools with potential for addressing GBV, yet their application has been largely underexplored.This paper brings the fields of social protection and GBV together through a comprehensive scoping review and presentation of the "state of the evidence".The paper moves beyond a focus on standalone programs to synthesise findings on the cross-cutting mechanisms by which the policies, programs, and administrative features of social protection systems can be leveraged to address violence against women in particular.The paper contributes to scholarship and practice by identifying promising entry points and design factors, as well as future directions for an actionable research agenda at the nexus of social protection and GBV prevention and response.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
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 it