ArticleFrontiers in sociology2026
Discursive structures of global development governance: a mixed-methods network analysis of an academic deliberative space in the context of FfD4.
Article in Frontiers in sociology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This article examines development financing as a field of global development governance by analyzing an academic deliberative space organized in parallel to the Fourth United Nations Conference on Financing for Development (FfD4). Drawing on critical development theory and critical perspectives on human rights, the study explores how expert debates respond to and reinterpret dominant framings of development financing as a neutral and technical set of instruments oriented toward efficient resource mobilization. Methodologically, the research combines qualitative discourse analysis with semantic network analysis, based on a systematically constructed corpus of recorded expert interventions and moderated debates produced during the academic event. The corpus includes contributions from diverse institutional actors participating in structured thematic panels. Using software-assisted coding (ATLAS.ti) and network analysis (UCINET), the study applies centrality measures (degree, closeness, and betweenness) to operationalize discourse as a relational structure. Analytical rigor was strengthened through iterative coding refinement, team-based review of categories, and structural robustness checks of the generated semantic networks. The findings reveal a hierarchically organized network in which concepts associated with cooperation, governance, sustainability, and innovation occupy structurally central positions, while narratives linked to social justice, community processes, and the expansion of rights remain comparatively peripheral. The findings suggest that development financing is predominantly framed through technocratic and procedural rationalities, while critical ethical perspectives circulate with more limited structural influence. By integrating discourse theory and social network analysis, the article contributes to sociological debates on global governance, power, and the organization of normative hierarchies in contemporary development.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.