Labour standards, global markets and non-state initiatives: Colombia's and Ecuador's flower industries in comparative perspective
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The recent wave of global economic expansion was triggered to a large extent by the relocation of labour-intensive industries in developing countries with low labour costs. While there is no doubt that this relocation has created employment, most of it is in low quality jobs. Non-state actors (private companies and ngos) have made efforts to improve labour standards in labour-intensive industries, but so far these have met with limited success. This article examines labour relations and non-state initiatives in Colombia's and Ecuador's flower export industries. It is argued that cheap labour and low labour standards are important, even though not the only, factors behind the relocation of flower production to Andean countries. It is also suggested that the effectiveness of non-state initiatives is undermined by disagreement between business organisations and ngos: while the former adopt a narrow technical perspective on labour standards, the latter support worker participation in monitoring and verification.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it