Economic Law and Standardization: A Basis for Avoiding Risks in Business
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently, in Ukraine, there is a system of technical regulation as part of the general system of standardization. Technical regulation is defined as a means of state regulation, which, like any legal regulation, is implemented by appropriate legal means. This explains the relevance of this study. This paper investigates the Economic Code of Ukraine, several Ukrainian laws (the Law of Ukraine "On Environmental Audit", the Law of Ukraine "On Standardization", the Law of Ukraine "On Technical Regulations and Conformity Assessment", etc.), and State standards. Technical regulation was also considered as a general category and a legal phenomenon, as a result of which it was noted that the technical regulation adopted in Ukraine for dividing products into food and non-food products is only a matter of supervision over the conformity of goods and the use of conditions for a specific legal act and type of product. It was concluded that standardization proceeds from social regulation and generates norms of a technical, organizational, or other orderly nature, transforming into legal provisions. Therewith, technical regulation also derives from legal regulation and gives rise to technical guidelines, which constitute statutory regulations that form part of the national legislation of Ukraine, including economic legislation. As a result, it is proposed to improve and supplement the wording of Part 2 Article 16 of the Law of Ukraine "On Standardization", and it is also proposed to reword Article 24 of the Law of Ukraine "On Technical Regulations and Conformity Assessment". Keywords: Technical regulation, laws of Ukraine, state standards, ISO, regulations.
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 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) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".