INTERNATIONAL LABOR MIGRATION: BETWEEN HUMAN RIGHTS AND POLITICAL OBJECTIVES
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper deals with the relation between the huma n right to migrate and the objectives of immigration policies. We argue that t he temporary work migration is the clearest sign of the failure of political governanc e in both the host and native states, even if we may argue, to a different degree. The only wa y to reduce the pressure of immigration in developed countries would be to allo w a freer global environment, in trade, industrial and taxation policies. 1. The present situation Among the core trends that define the contemporary process of globalization is the significant increase in cross border flows of workf orce. While in 1990 there were 154 millions of foreign residents on the Globe, in 2000 their number reached 175 millions (that is, approximately 3% of the world population) 1 . The rate of growth in foreign residency surpasses the rate of growth of the world population and the foreign residents are sometimes called, due to their number, “the fif th largest country in the world”. 60% of them live and work in the developed countries, wher e 5% of the workforce has a foreign passport. United States of America absorbs 80% of t he annual flow of individuals who leave developing countries in order to go to work i n developed countries while Canada and Australia another 11%. The amplitude of the process cannot be fully reveal ed unless we take into consideration the so-called “irregulars”. They are individuals who breach somehow the regime for international movement of persons as the y may be illegal immigrants (who illegally cross the borders), legal tourists who ta ke a job (so they are not really tourists), persons with forged documents and so on, comprising another 10-15% of the entire number of foreign residents. In United States of Am erica, their number is conservatively assessed at around 10 millions, in a population of 300 millions 2 while in Western Europe the number of persons with an irregular status is a ppreciated ‐ also conservatively ‐ at around 4 millions. As a consequence, we witness a significant trend in the international economy by which an increasing number of individuals choose to work (legally or illegally) in a
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".