Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sustainable development has become an important issue for trade unions around the world, but progress on sustainable development has been slow. Agenda 21, which came out of the 1992 UN Conference on Environment and Development in Rio de Janeiro, called on workers and trade unions to assume an active role. The International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU) and the Trade Union Advisory Committee (TUAC) to the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) became influential players who represent more than 155 million members in 148 countries and territories. The implementation of Agenda 21 has been hampered by bureaucratic gridlock--a situation that trade unions propose to overcome through innovative strategies on workplaces and workers. They realize that sustainable development cannot take place without radical changes in production and consumption. Globalization is creating opulence on the one hand and grinding poverty on the other. ICFTU and TUAC propose a new "world order" that includes democratic decision-making, popular accountability, transparency, and local control. They have proposed priorities, outlined in this article, for an international approach to sustainable development.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".