Reifying 'Vision 2040': a Conceptual Framework for Community-Driven Development and Participatory Local Governance in The Bahamas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The ossification of inequitable power dynamics in liberal democracies often leads to the general populace receiving an abating share of decision-making authority. In many instances, this is innately true for democracies that inherited systematised conduits of subjugation and inequality from colonial ontology. For these post-colonial environments, the vestiges of colonial governance maintain limited avenues to public influence in crucial decision-making, while environmental factors like demographic growth exacerbate pre-existing constraints. In The Bahamas, the development of Vision 2040: The National Development Plan of The Bahamas presents an opportunity to mitigate the challenges that have arisen from this policy environment through a comprehensive policy framework and reform agenda guided by broad consultative engagement, interdisciplinary research, and extensive analysis. Leveraging the space for further research provided by ‘Vision 2040,’ this thesis seeks to delineate a two-part conceptualisation that outlines a pathway for socio-political and socio-economic development that may yield community ownership, control and influence over their resources and governance systems.
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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".