Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper focuses on the OECD's Strategy, which became a principal means for the OECD to promote a neo-liberal model of social and employment policy to its member states and it also influenced the European Union's employment strategy. Yet important modifications were introduced in 2006 with the recognition of an alternative policy path, ‘flexicurity.’ While the latter accepted neoliberal macroeconomic ‘fundamentals,’ it broke with neoliberalism to the extent that it recognized a positive role for labour market regulations and social policies in promoting security and social inclusion. The paper analyses the politics associated with this shift, using the concept of ‘organisational discourse’ to get at the dynamic (and contested) nature of the OECD's ideational lens. While the OECD came under pressure from some of its member states to alter its ‘one size fits all’ strategy, the Economics Department, whose version of the discourse initially dominated, was also challenged from within by the Directorate for Employment, Labour and Social Affairs (DELSA), which developed its own alternative discourse.
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 | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".