MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Removing barriers to recruiting, retaining and advancing women in science and technology fields for promoting green industries in Colombia

2024· article· en· W4408470873 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Margarita Fontecha, Silvia Sarapura

Bibliographic record

VenueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and Policy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHigher Education and Sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Guelph
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEngineering ethicsBusinessEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the last decade, the Gender-Transformative Approach (GTA) has pivoted the frame used by international cooperation and academic research in gender integration; however, there is insufficient information regarding how the GTA operates in executing projects and programs. We evaluated a development project in rural areas of Valle del Cauca (Colombia). The project was implemented by Autónoma University and funded by the International Development Research Center (IDRC). The project sought to remove barriers to recruiting, retaining and advancing women in science and technology fields for promoting green industries in the South American Country. The project was designed within the GTA as one of the theoretical approaches for its implementation. Our goal was to identify to what extent the project's activities have impacted the successful inclusion of GTA. Based on the Typologies of Change: Gender Integration in Agriculture and Food Security Research developed by the Royal Tropical Institute (KIT), we designed a methodology that allows us to map i) what strategies enable gender equality and transformation in the project ii) what level the strategies impact (individual, community, organizational) iii) the relationship between the strategies and the results.Our research included an exploratory phase where we conducted informal interviews in the field. We reviewed the project's documents and conducted 12 semi-structured interviews with diverse actors (beneficiaries, project team, institutions, and organization representatives). Our results indicate that combining soft and hard strategies enables transformations at the individual and community levels.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.660
Threshold uncertainty score0.987

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.361
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRural Review Ontario Rural Planning Development and PolicySame topicHigher Education and SustainabilityFrench-language works237,207