Conceptualising Peacebuilding: Human Security and Sustainable Peace
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
Internal conflicts in the 1990s present the international community with a dilemma to which it is unaccustomed: by what means may these intractable crises be managed such that they do not result in the outbreak or resumption of armed hostilities? While there is still a role for those instruments of conflict management employed during the Cold War, such as peacekeeping operations, the conflicts we face now are no longer purely military in nature, nor will they be resolved by military solutions alone. Growing international recognition of the human cost of such protracted conflict, in addition to other post-Cold War developments, has led the international community to re-conceptualise security and its implications for policy planning. States such as Canada, Sweden and Norway have been at the forefront of this effort. This evolution in the perception of international security has contributed to the emergence of the concept of 'human security'. Integrating socioeconomic and developmental concerns with recognition of the importance of political stability, human security also breaks new ground by looking at perceptions of security in a wider range of human communities than that defined by the modern state.KeywordsInternal ConflictHuman SecurityViolent ConflictPeace AccordPeace ProcessThese keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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