MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407860065 · doi:10.1057/s41309-025-00232-2

The ‘inclusion’ of civil society in the Organization of African Unity

2025· article· en· W4407860065 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInterest Groups & Advocacy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivil societyInclusion (mineral)Political sciencePolitical communicationSociologySocial sciencePolitical economyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract An increasing number of intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) have established participatory mechanisms for nongovernmental organizations (NGOs). Although affiliation with an IGO has been widely accepted as a source of NGO legitimacy, there have been few systematic efforts to investigate the mechanism of the institutional legitimation of NGOs. We investigate African NGOs affiliated with the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) to examine whether the rational-legal authority of IGOs is sufficient for the institutional legitimation of NGOs. We conducted a mini-case study as well as a longitudinal statistical analysis of African NGOs. We find evidence that the OAU affiliation status negatively impacted the growth of African NGOs. We conclude that the OAU used its affiliation status to invite ‘friends’ of state leaders instead of supporting the bottom-up voice of African civil society. Our study suggests that an IGO’s rational-legal authority is not enough for NGO legitimacy, but the institutional legitimation of NGOs may require substantive democratic deliberation.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.761
Threshold uncertainty score0.280

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.213 · 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