MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413303295 · doi:10.1080/09614524.2025.2544025

Claiming agency and creating change: shifting power in international non-government organisations

2025· article· en· W4413303295 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

VenueDevelopment in Practice · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsHealth Care Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Power (physics)Government (linguistics)Civil societyPolitical scienceBusinessEconomic growthEconomic systemPublic administrationEconomicsPoliticsSociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Historical criticisms of self-interest among international non-government organisations (INGOs) have recently gone further, suggesting INGOs are neo-colonial in nature. To address these concerns and reclaim their legitimacy, INGOs are actively pursuing localisation and locally led development initiatives. These terms are contested, however, and scholarly literature on INGO approaches is limited. Using a detailed multi-year case study approach, this paper provides unique insights into how power relations and interests shape these day-to-day practices. In so doing the article problematises the processes of INGO legitimation and provides some important clues as to how and why localisation processes are likely to face significant obstacles.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.433

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.318 · 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