Humanitarian engagement with Myanmar in the wake of the 2021 coup
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article investigates humanitarian engagement with Myanmar in the wake of the 2021 coup. It opens by examining humanitarian action in Myanmar before 2010, during the 2010s, and after 2021. Drawing on key stakeholder interviews conducted in 2023, it then presents internal and external perspectives on humanitarianism in Myanmar in the 2020s. While the Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 and the outbreak of war in Gaza in 2023 generated significant attention from donor nations, humanitarian needs in Myanmar, encompassing 18.6 million citizens, including 3.4 million internally displaced persons, go largely unmet. The argument from international society is that regional states should work towards a ‘Myanmar-led’ solution. Challenges faced by local and international actors, however, raise questions about the possibility of a solution that bridges the divide between these two humanitarian communities and is also acceptable to all groups in Myanmar. The article concludes by proposing that initiatives at the regional and global levels coalesce, overcome actor territoriality and generate political will by putting affected communities at the centre of humanitarian engagement to overcome current limitations and barriers to action.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".