Protecting Migrant Labor Rights in the Distant-Water Fisheries Sector: A Comparative Analysis of the Legal Framework of Three Major Fishing Nations in Eastern Asia
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
This study evaluated the legal frameworks that addressed the rights of migrant fishers in Taiwan, Japan, and South Korea, using selected provisions of the ILO Work in Fishing Convention, C188, as the criteria. Based on the findings, several recommendations are presented to improve migrant labor rights in the distant water fisheries (DWF). These include further aligning national laws with C188 provisions, enhancing pre-employment training programs for foreign fishers, prioritizing medical care and safety measures, and working with associations of fishers to improve compliance with labor and safety regulations. Collaborative co-management strategies, partnerships with worker and non-governmental organizations, and public awareness campaigns are also recommended. Encouraging corporate social responsibility among fishery corporations can improve working conditions and fair treatment for migrant fishers. In conclusion, by implementing the suggested policy measures, governments can make progress toward achieving fair treatment for migrant workers in the fisheries industry and support United Nations Sustainable Development Goals.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 it