A Missed Opportunity: The Fundamental Rights Agency and the Euro Area Crisis
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
Abstract This paper focuses on the role played by the Agency for Fundamental Rights in the wake of the euro area crisis. The Agency was created as part of a wider trend towards a broader, more pro‐active strategy for the protection of fundamental rights that includes administrative and political rights promotion as a complement to judicial enforcement. In the context of the euro crisis, however, the Agency has not been able to fulfil this role. This paper will analyze the reasons for this missed opportunity, as well as its consequences. It will argue that the sidelining of the Agency in this area is due to the confluence of two factors: on the one hand, the Agency's lack of discretion in setting its own agenda; and, on the other, the predominance of the executive, and resulting resurgence of intergovernmentalism, that have been a feature of post‐crisis developments. Ultimately, this paper argues that the sidelining of the Agency in this context is an unfortunate result, given the magnitude of the political debate in this area and the valuable role that the Agency might have played or could still play in informing it.
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 | 0.003 | 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) | 0.001 | 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