MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2041209653 · doi:10.1177/1468018107073911

Too Weak for the Job

2007· article· en· W2041209653 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Social Policy · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impact
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSweatshopRestructuringEnforcementBusinessCompliance (psychology)Labour lawLabour economicsEconomicsMarket economyPolitical scienceLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The shift of economic production from higher labour standard regimes in the global North to lower standard regimes in the South is undermining enforcement of global labour standards. Responding to criticisms from the ‘anti-sweatshop’ movement, consumers and governments, many transnational corporations (TNCs) have adopted codes of conduct to regulate labour standards in their supplier factories. Non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are increasingly used to monitor compliance with these codes. This article analyses the monitoring effectiveness of three kinds of such ‘third party’ NGOs. It concludes that major monitoring deficiencies reflect, first, significant organizational weaknesses of the NGOs and their dependence on TNCs for whom they monitor; second, powerful limits imposed on NGO effectiveness by corporate restructuring and market competitiveness; and third, inadequate pressures from anti-sweatshop movements, consumers and governments. These constraints suggest that this NGO-centred, ‘soft law’ policy approach is ‘too weak for the job’.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.689
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.297 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it