Feminist International Assistance Policy Kanada: Studi Kasus Bantuan CFLI untuk Jakarta Feminist 2017–2021
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to analyze the assistance provided by the Canada Fund for Local Initiatives to the Jakarta Feminist in the 2017-2021 period as one of the proofs that Canada's Feminist International Assistance Policy has so far been running smoothly. In addition, this article also aims to correct the misunderstandings of foreign policy observers regarding FIAP as a feminist foreign policy. FIAP has so far only used elements of Liberal Feminism as a lens of observation to focus on their foreign aid agenda to achieve a safe, inclusive, and prosperous world development. Therefore, this article argues that FIAP does contain elements of Feminism but focuses more on assisting non-profit organizations in developing countries, one of which is Indonesia. By using a descriptive qualitative research method that processes primary and secondary data from personal interviews and literature review, this article finds that CFLI, under the auspices of FIAP, has been successful in assisting the Jakarta Feminist in 2017-2021 and has also managed to reveal that FIAP is not a feminist foreign policy. FIAP oversees several foreign aid programs initiated by Canada for developing countries, one of which is CFLI.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".