Regulação social tardia: característica das políticas sociais latino-americanas na passagem entre o segundo e terceiro milénios
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Os paises latino-americanos tem caracteristicas diversas dos paises europeus -a excepcao do Sui da Europa- no processo de regulacao social entre Estado-sociedade-rnercado das provisoes· publicas as necessidades sociais dos cidadaos. Tais caracteristicas decorrem de condicoes historico- politicas que demarcam: i) o alcance da universalizacao de cidadania no pais; ii) as pre-condicoes historicas para as politicas sociais, isto e, a transicao de formas disciplinares e de benemerencia -a exemplo o Poor Law- para a provisao publica na condicao de direito universal e nao atencao a necessitados; iii) o alcance do processo democratico dos governos e da representacao social dos diversos segmentos sociais {sobretudo dos caracterizados como o dos carentes); iv) o modo de regulacao social das desigualdades e exclusoes sociais. A analise deste conjunto de condicoes t1ttz uma forma particular de influencia de regulacao social neoliberal distinta de sua forma europeia que tem sido reproduzida pelos analistas como se fosse universal. O impacto do neoliberalismo nos paises de regulacao social tardia, isto e, no ultimo quartel do seculo XX vai ter a influencia do processo de democratizacao e reconhecimento de direitos sociais, presentes em novos actos constitucionais. Por decorrencia e incorrecto afirmar que o neoliberalismo provoca o desmanche social em paises de regulacao social tardia. Os gastos sociais crescem nesses paises ate mesmo pelas experiencias de municipalizarao das politicas sociais. Isto nos leva a indagar sobre particularidade do impacto neoliberal em tais paises. Esta em curso uma nova geracao de producao e gestao das politicas pos-keynesianismo e pos-neoliberalismo demarcadas pela heterogeneidade territorial e equidade com novos temas de gestao social.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".