MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407196440 · doi:10.15173/glj.v16i1.5883

The Gig Economy and Its Impact on Women in Iraq

2025· article· en· W4407196440 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hawra Milani, Zahra Shah, Rikke Bjerg Jensen

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Labour Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGig economyBusinessPolitical scienceEconomyPolitical economyEconomicsService economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The gig economy has significantly transformed Iraq’s labour market, creating new opportunities for women while also exposing persistent inequalities. This paper traces the experiences of Iraqi women in the gig economy, drawing on both individual and collective insights grounded in the authors’ work in this context. These experiences reveal the dual nature of the gig economy: providing flexible work options while perpetuating vulnerabilities such as discrimination and economic insecurity. By situating our analysis within Iraq’s unique socio-economic conditions, including women’s low workforce engagement and infrastructural challenges, we contribute to a deeper understanding of the dynamics shaping women’s participation in this emerging labour market. The paper explores the types of gig work available to Iraqi women, alongside the structural barriers they face, such as limited digital infrastructure and inadequate legal protections. We conclude by highlighting actionable pathways for improving economic outcomes for women and fostering inclusive growth in the gig economy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.009
GPT teacher head0.329
Teacher spread0.320 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Labour JournalSame topicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle EastFrench-language works237,207