The Impact of Europeanization on Social Systems of the EU Member States: The Case of the Swedish Labour Market
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Master thesis "The Impact of Europeanization on Social Systems of the EU Member States: The Case of the Swedish Labour Market" elaborates on the potential influence of the EU on the social policy of its members. Although the social policy has formally been left in the competences of national states, there are certain possible ways whereby the EU can affect it. The instruments of Europeanization in the social area are identified and then tested on the case of the Swedish labour market. On the one hand, there are direct instruments of Europeanization in the social policy represented by the Open method of coordination (OMC) which is an unbinding EU legislation, and on the other hand, there are indirect mechanisms proceeding by the application of the rules of the internal EU market. Concerning specifically the Swedish labour market, it could have been affected by the Swedish participation on the European Employment Strategy (EES) that is based on the OMC, or through the ECJ decision in the Laval case which dealt with the freedom to provide services. In this respect, the specific Swedish model of labour market has played an important role. It is characterised by traditionally strong position of social partners and collective agreements as well as by the highly developed active labour market policy....
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".