India Employment Report 2016: Challenges and the Imperative of Manufacturing-Led Growth
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
What is the nature of the employment problem that India faces? What kind of economic growth is required to address it? As India posits itself as one of the fastest growing major economies in the world, India Employment Report 2016 examines how the employment challenge undermines the substantial improvement that the economy has made in the last decade and a half. This report provides an in-depth review of the evolving characteristics of the country's labour force, develops new tools for a sharper analysis of the changes in employment conditions, and gives a clearer view of the state of employment in India. Presenting a comprehensive overview of the policy interventions that would be required for the development of India's growth strategy, the report brings out that pursuing a manufacturing-led growth strategy can help the country overcome this formidable challenge. This report has been prepared by the Institute for Human Development (IHD), New Delhi, under the institute's programme on labour markets and employment studies. This is the second report in the series of analytical reports being published biennially by the institute. The present report has been supported by the South Asia Research Network (SARNET) on Employment and Social Protection for Inclusive Growth, which has been initiated by the IHD in collaboration with the United Nations Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (UN-ESCAP) and International Labour Organization (ILO) with support from International Development Research Centre (IDRC), Canada.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 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