MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416058824 · doi:10.1093/sp/jxaf044

Bringing Women Back into the (Collective) Kitchen: The Case of the Ley de comedores sociales in Mexico City

2025· article· en· W4416058824 on OpenAlexafffund
Nora Nagels, Françoise Montambeault

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Politics International Studies in Gender State & Society · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Labor, and Family Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCitizenshipFraming (construction)Latin AmericansMexico cityPoliticsArgument (complex analysis)Social citizenship

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Women’s participation in informal and collective carework in Latin America has had ambiguous effects on their access to extended citizenship rights, from which they have been traditionally excluded. In this paper, we examine the case of the 2009 Ley de comedores sociales in Mexico city, which institutionalizes the pivotal role of women as administrators of the community-based comedores comunitarios (community kitchens). Drawing from insights from the literatures on women’s citizenship in Latin America and on gender analysis of social policy, we look at how the policy framing shapes women’s everyday citizenship practices and, in turn, their access to formal citizenship rights. We argue that, because of its regendering nature, Mexico City’s policy has had a very limited effect on women’s access to formal social and political rights. Our argument draws from two complementary qualitative methods: policy content analysis and a series of in-depth interviews with women administrators of the comedores.

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)0.001
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 score0.146
Threshold uncertainty score0.291

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.383
Teacher spread0.303 · 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

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Politics International Studies in Gender State & SocietySame topicGender, Labor, and Family DynamicsFrench-language works237,207