Introduction: Citizenship, Participation and Community Action in Colombia's Post‐Peace Accord Security Landscape
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Colombia has experienced numerous peace initiatives in recent decades, most notably the 2016 Peace Accords between the Government of Colombia and the largest insurgent group the Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia -Ejército del Pueblo (FARC-EP, Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia -People's Army).Despite these multilevel initiatives, the security panorama in Colombia continues to be characterised by instability.Reductive understandings of security and the lack of widespread citizen participation have stymied peacebuilding efforts and led to policy responses that are often not in accordance with societal needs.One example of this is the state promotion of heavy-handed coca eradication policies, notably during the 2018-2022 Duque government, that consider neither the vulnerabilities nor the rural political economies that motivate people to grow coca.State actions that ignore, or even exacerbate, people's security concerns end up causing frustration and resentment, particularly among already marginalised communities.The sense of disconnection thereby generated between citizens and the government threatens to undermine the progress made in reducing the harms caused by armed conflict in Colombia.This special section features a range of analytical approaches to the study of citizen security, community action and participation, highlighting how state-centred perspectives often overlook the sociospatial dynamics that increase the risk of marginalisation and insecurity.The genesis of this Special Section is the constructive conversations held in a series of Cross-Stakeholder Forums in 2019 featuring participants from the Colombian state, international organisations, academia, professional civil society and grassroots communities.The Cross-Stakeholder Forums were organised by Pembroke College Oxford's CONPEACE (from Conflict Actors to Architects of Peace) Programme thanks to funding from Global Affairs Canada's Peace and Stabilisation Operations Program with the objective of analysing ongoing challenges to peace and security in the aftermath of the Peace Accords.The opening article by Dáire McGill, Jan Boesten, Annette Idler and Oscar Palma sets out a conceptual framework on marginalisation and insecurity in Colombia using citizen security as an analytical lens to explore the relationship between constrained citizenship, marginalisation and violence.Tracing historical and contemporary patterns of geographic, sociocultural, political and economic marginalisation reveals the violence inherent in the processes of economic accumulation, human settlement and state creation.The article further highlights the de-marginalising potential of some recent processes, arguing that realising such potential will depend on their levels of community participation and inclusiveness.Drawing on fieldwork in Colombia's Northern Cesar Department and a series of Cross-Stakeholder Forums in 2019, this article centres the perspectives of those experiencing marginalisation to better understand and conceptualise the challenges of citizenship during transitions from armed conflict to sustainable peace.It is hoped that this enhanced understanding of the intersecting processes that make particular regions, groups, communities and
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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 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".