The Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA): What Kind of Space is Given to Fair Trade and Labour Rights?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il presente lavoro analizza da una prospettiva giuslavoristica il Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), trattato internazionale di libero scambio, da poco sottoscritto da Unione Europea e Canada: il saggio si interroga se tale trattato possa contribuire o meno allo sviluppo del fair trade all'interno delle democrazie occidentali. Nel dettaglio l'articolo analizza le clausole del CETA alla luce dei core labour standards dell'ILO, con un focus sulle clausole arbitrali di risoluzione delle controversie (Investor-State Dispute Settlement), sulle forme di partecipazione della società civile e sui meccanismi di eccezione. Nelle conclusioni, nonostante la tendenziale omogeneità socio-economica tra Canada e Unione Europea, viene sostenuto come il CETA non sia in grado di assicurare automaticamente il rispetto dei diritti sociali nel contesto del commercio internazionale, con il rischio di una corsa al ribasso delle tutele.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".