Feministyczna polityka zagraniczna Republiki Federalnej Niemiec – założenia teoretyczne i wymiar praktyczny w kontekście wojny w Ukrainie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
GERMANY’S FEMINIST FOREIGN POLICY IN THEORY AND IN PRACTICE IN THE CONTEXT OF THE WAR IN UKRAINE The concept of a feminist foreign policy, which aims, among others, to counteract all forms of discrimination, inequality and gender stereotypes against women around the world, has been gaining in importance over the past few years. The first countries that decided to adopt its theoretical principles into political practice were Sweden and Canada. When Annalena Baerbock assumed the office of Minister of Foreign Affairs in 2021, Germany joined this group as well. The diplomatic strategy towards women she announced, based on rights, resources, representation and diversity, constitutes the new orientation of German foreign policy. The goal of the article is to present the origins and definition of Feminist Foreign Policy, the principles of this concept presented by Auswärtiges Amt, the examples of the activities within the scope of the feminist foreign policy undertaken in Germany so far, as well as the analysis of the challenges related to implementing its main themes, especially in the face of the Russia-Ukraine war.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".