The Role of Law in the Rule of Economics: A Critical Study of Ghana’s Labor Laws
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adopting a critical theory framework, this paper is especially concerned with linking the economics, law, and politics and their concomitant mediations/interconnections and contradictions. Specifically, the purposes of this paper are to: (a) analyze historically how law has been pliant to the needs of powerful interests or influences by unmasking the disciplinary nature of Ghanian labor laws. The historical origins and transformations of labor relations were not only the deliberate ambiguities of sanctions but also the conflicts waged by the state to secure the respective interests of the privileged; and, (b) specify the conditions under which labor was not free from domination. The conception of the labor-law nexus was based on struggle. The normative foundations that constitute the construction of labor, political, and economic relations contextualizes how social practices reproduce dominant forms of inequality, law, class, and social control. Consistent with critical theory, this paper upholds the significance of historical knowledge for social criticism and political change. Historical analysis enables us to grasp continuities and discontinuities with the past and to develop resources to change. This study demonstrates that law is not shaped by moral consensus but by the relative power of groups who use scarce resources to impose their economic preferences. Both legitimacy and coercion are persuasively achieved through law, economics, culture, and politics—the foundations of Ghana’s post-colonial developments.
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 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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".