MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2912080266 · doi:10.1111/imig.12553

Competition Between Labour‐Sending States and the Branding of National Workforces

2019· article· en· W2912080266 on OpenAlexaffabout
Geraldina Polanco

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Migration · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Ethnicity, and Economy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersInternational Labour Organization
KeywordsCompetition (biology)Work (physics)Political scienceRace (biology)Labour economicsBusinessSociologyEconomicsGender studiesEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Drawing from comparative, international field research examining fast food labour migration from the Philippines and Mexico to western Canada, I contrast the Mexican and Filipino migration apparatuses and the corresponding branding of their citizenry. I show that the Philippines, through its migration apparatus, brands the Philippines as a source of “exceptional” labour, in part by deploying college graduates and those with professional work experience to work in entry‐level occupations. In turn, they outpace other labour‐sending states – like Mexico – who are branded in less desirable terms for interactive occupations. The policy decision to deskill (or not) and to produce (or fail to produce) educated and “exceptional” mobile subjects operates either as a conveyer belt or a migratory wall for distinct states in their ability to send more workers overseas. This has broader implications for global race relations and the branding effects that underlie Temporary Migrant Worker Programs.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.282 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations11
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational MigrationSame topicMigration, Ethnicity, and EconomyFrench-language works237,207