Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article aims at analyzing domestic and foreign experience in social policy provision (the essence of the concept, its basic models and directions), as it acts as a kind of lever to determine the principles, priorities, directions of the social sphere development. The article suggests a new definition of the "social policy" concept through analyzing the content of the category in question. The public administration approach to understanding the "social policy" concept is also outlined. The article identifies the priority directions of transformations in the EU member states’ social policy, which are taking place due to globalization challenges. Based on these areas, the main principles of European social policy are identified, namely: inclusiveness, gender equality, digitalization, support for youth policy development (employment, education), and financial education of citizens. Social policy in such countries as Canada, Germany, China, and Australia is analyzed, and peculiarities of its changes due to the COVID-19 pandemic are considered in the following areas: support for employment, social protection and the unemployed; social support for certain social groups; support for business development. The main means helping to implement the outlined areas are identified, namely: creation of funds to support certain social groups; formation of favorable conditions for lending to small, medium and large businesses; financing of various social programs (providing employment, training, and wage subsidies). The main directions of domestic social policy in the COVID-19 pandemic are also given. Relevant conclusions on domestic and foreign experience in the implementation of social policy are formed. Further research can be related to the issues of creating a mechanism for an effective social policy implementation.
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".