The Health Case for Economic and Social Rights Against the Global Marketplace
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
“All observations of life are harsh, because life is. I lament that fact, but I cannot change it.” —Margaret Atwood, The Tent (McClelland and Stewart 2006) Over the past few decades, most of the world's economies and societies have been integrated into the global marketplace, revealing and deepening various socioeconomic divisions. In this article, I undertake three major tasks. First, I outline the processes that have led to that deepening, identify the underlying set of values, and indicate the connection with influences on population health. Second, I compare and contrast a policy perspective that takes seriously economic and social rights related to health with the values of the global marketplace. Third, I argue that emerging aspects of globalization underscore the urgency of the human rights challenge to the global marketplace. I also suggest a research agenda focusing on the conditions under which governments are likely to respond in ways that strengthen their commitment to economic and social rights domestically and internationally, while at the same time offering some rather pessimistic observations about the prospects for policy change.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.000 |
| 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 it