Building Flexibility and Accountability Into Local Employment Services: Country Report for Belgium
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
Human resources and skills are becoming increasingly important to economic development. In the context of the economic downturn, challenges such as high youth unemployment call for a collaborative approach between local employment officials, educational institutions and wider social and economic partners. But do local labour market offices have sufficient flexibility in the implementation of their policies and programmes to contribute effectively to local strategies? If local labour market offices are to be given more flexibility, how can this be reconciled with the need for accountability and the achievement of national policy goals?The Belgium case study for the Building Flexibility and Accountability into Local Employment Services project explores the level of local accountability and flexibility within labour market policy in Flanders, focusing in particular on the Flemish Public Employment Service (VDAB), municipalities and the regional tripartite consultation platforms SERRs and RESOCs. This report is one of four country reports, with the other participating countries being Canada, Denmark and the Netherlands. A synthesis report is also available (see Working Paper 2011/10).
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 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