Vita e Tempi dell' eta illiberale: appalto e concorrenza tra codice civile ed evidenza pubblica
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a study in the relationship between the civil law substantial rules of competition and contract and the (not very much related) public laws of transparency and procedure for awards of contracts under competition rules. \nThe book title refers to a famous work of the Canadian Philosopher McPherson. The topic remains the civil and public law of procurement and it is looked at and considered through the lens of the enforcement of labour compliance statutes (which is one of the "evidence" requisites). The topic is though treated in the larger context of general principles of "liberalism", with particular reference to the rule of law. It offers also a personal insight in the nature of "post - modern society" as a social structure based on a new (reverted) relationship between individual rights and public spending (and debt) as the source of their entitlement or "in - vestiment" (see RUDDEN). It is submitted that "in-vest(i)ment" by debt has substituted in-vest(i)ment(um) in the land as the main source and mean of control of wealth. \nThis paper performs in depth analysis of the Italian system for certification of labour compliance as a requisite of public procurements. The resulting conclusions show the interaction between the definitions of "contract" in public and private law . \nThe UE directives on public supply adopted a neutral definition of contract as "any economic operation made by any economic person". This concept is largely independent from the economic and legal "substance" of the contract, as far as it discriminates contracts by their sheer economic value, in order to submit them to public rules of transparency and procedure in the award process. \nPrivate law rules , on the other side, depend on the substance of the contract and, while regulating in a different way different kinds of contract, are largely neutral to their economic value. \nThe paper shows how far the neutral concept of contract communicates from public to civil law, via the competition rules, in Italian law. First, making all contracts of any kind subject to transparency rules, without any reference to their "substance"; second, applying public rules of competition to (almost) ALL contracts for work,products and service supply without any reference to their economic value; third adopting the competition oriented neutral definition as a basis to compel compliance of any (not competition oriented) transparency requirements whatsoever EVEN when they are not made subject to competition requirements. \nIt is submitted that, by this approach, a large number of contracts in the "public sector" have been subtracted to public controls - e.g. rules against money washing, conflict of interests and corruption - because the public party (say, a public corporation with no exclusive rights) is "exposed to competition on the market". Whilst a large number of public contracts that, by their economic treshold, should be exonerated even by competiton rules, have been made subject to ALL public rules because the public contractor (universitiers, local authorities and the like) must be "transparent" to competition. This conclusion stands even in fields, like labour law compliance, where enforcement of social security credits depends on the particular substance of a particular contract. \nThis conclusion appears with particular strenght in Italian law, where the "neutral" definition on the directives has NOT been transplanted, in the official national instrument, with the Italian noun for a generic operation (say "supply" contract", "procurement") but with a noun ("appalto") that under italian civil law (art. 1655 c.c.) designates a specific contract that, by its nature, was reserved to construction of buildings (see official version of draft directive "on public procurement" - com 2011-896 - as "direttiva sugli appalti".
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 | 0.014 | 0.040 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".