Localising Women, Peace, and Security: community agency and ownership beyond national policies
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the localisation of the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) agenda as a contested political process shaped by negotiations between local, national, and international actors. Drawing on semi-structured interviews with activists and women peacebuilders in 10 conflict-affected contexts, alongside analysis of policy documents, it explores how localisation is understood, implemented, and experienced at the community level. Findings reveal that while localisation can amplify community agency and embed WPS commitments in subnational governance, it is often constrained by centralised decision-making, tokenistic consultation, resource precarity, and donor-driven priorities. Effective localisation emerges where sustained relationships, direct funding to grassroots actors, inclusive participation, and multi-level accountability converge. This article advances a justice-oriented conceptualisation of localisation, reframing it from a technical exercise to a transformative process of redistributing power. It argues for context-responsive strategies that prioritise community ownership and ensure WPS implementation reaches the sites where peace and security are most urgently contested.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it