Shadow Colony: Refugees and the Pursuit of the Liberian-American Dream
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation is about the people living at the Buduburam Liberian refugee camp in Ghana and how they navigate their position within a social hierarchy that is negotiated on a global terrain. The lives of refugees living in Ghana are constituted through vast and complex social relations that span across the camp, Ghana, West Africa and nations further afield such as the United States, Canada and Australia. The conditions under which these relations have developed and continue to unfold are mediated by structural forces of nation-state policies, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the international governing body for refugees, and the global political economy. Situated within the broader politics of protracted refugee situations and the question of why people stay in long-term camps, this research is a case study of one refugee camp and how its people access resources, build livelihoods and struggle with power. In particular, this dissertation uses concepts of the Liberian-American dream and the shadow colony to explore the historic and contemporary terms and circumstances through which Liberian refugees experience and evaluate migratory prospects and restrictions.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".