MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7097809923

CPSA Paper- Spronk DEVELOPMENT AND GLOBALIZATION: STRUGGLES AGAINST WATER PRIVATIZATION

2011· article· en· W7097809923 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTourism, Volunteerism, and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGlobalizationFunctionalism (philosophy of mind)Paradigm shiftConstruct (python library)Perspective (graphical)Process (computing)Washington Consensus
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impasse of development studies of the mid-1980s initiated many attempts to construct theories of development that avoid the perceived economism and functionalism of Marxistinspired development theories (Schuurman 1993). With the exhaustion of the impasse debate, international development studies is confronting yet another challenge: globalization. As the authors of a recent review of international development studies in Canada observe, globalization threatens to create another “impasse ” because “we have an inability to decide whether to treat it as a fundamental paradigm shift away from development, or to examine it from the perspective of development as just another notion that adds to the complexity of the paradigm itself” (Vainio-Mattila, Inwood, and Parmar 2004:162). This paper contributes to this debate by critically evaluating two different perspectives on the relationship between globalization and “development”. Philip McMichael adopts the former perspective, arguing that “globalization ” represents a fundamental paradigm shift away from “development”. Henry Veltmeyer and James Petras, by contrast, argue that “globalization ” is just another phase in a long process of imperialist expansion. The first part of the paper outlines how the authors define the relationship between

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.220 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTourism, Volunteerism, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207