scholarly journals HISTORICAL CLASSIFICATION AND EFFICIENCY OF THE SUPERVISORY SYSTEM OF INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANIZATION

Author(s):  
HUSEYIN SEVGI

Objective: International Labor Organization (ILO) has established some supervisory systems to check the extent to which its decisions are implemented. With these supervisory systems, the organization tries to determine to what extent its decisions are implemented by the member countries. In this context, this study aims to classify the types of ILO supervisory systems and to analyze how they work and how effective they are. Methods: This study is based on a systematic literature review. Rather than the traditional literature review, a systematic literature review implies that efficient, systematic, and reproducible methods to identify, evaluate, and synthesize existing literature. As the basis of the literature review, ScienceDirect databases have been selected. 239 research articles and 23 book chapters were analyzed. Results: When we examine the supervisory mechanisms in the ILO, one point should be emphasized to fully grasp the topic as a whole and to define the impact of the organization in today’s global capitalist system: ILO is an international organization with no concrete sanction power despite its many supervisory systems. Conclusions: The main reason for the lack of sanction tools in the ILO’s control system lies in its ideological background. As a representative of the reformist ideology, the ILO aims to impose its rules on the states by “persuasion method” as required by this ideology.

Asian Survey ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 61 (4) ◽  
pp. 615-640
Author(s):  
Yun Zhang ◽  
Yimeng Jia

Why and how did the International Labor Organization and the military junta of Myanmar transform their relationship so dramatically, from confrontation to cooperation, between 2007 and 2010? What insights can be drawn from this case regarding the successful operation of an international organization in an authoritarian environment? By investigating the evolution of the military leadership’s perception, this article aims to demystify authoritarian decision-making and identify the interactive mechanisms operating between internal and external dynamics and between an authoritarian regime and an international organization. The qualitative fieldwork includes direct interviews with former top military government leaders, who provide valuable insights into the decision-making logic at the highest level.


1993 ◽  
Vol 47 (2) ◽  
pp. 235-262 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Strang ◽  
Patricia Mei Yin Chang

National welfare programs are importantly affected by models of welfare activity institutionalized at the global level. This article examines the impact of the welfare regime advocated by and within the International Labor Organization (ILO). Countries that have recently ratified ILO conventions related to welfare show increased growth in spending, net of national characteristics. Subanalyses show that the effects of ILO ratification are strong in the industrialized capitalist democracies, particularly where prior welfare spending is low and the working class has a weakly institutionalized role in policymaking. ILO ratification seems disconnected from spending in the less developed countries. Legislative case studies point to similar patterns. These findings suggest that international norms contribute to policy where they offer compelling models that powerful actors can use to legitimate policy innovation.


2021 ◽  
Vol 80 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. 1337.2-1337
Author(s):  
T. W. Swinnen ◽  
M. Willems ◽  
I. Jonkers ◽  
F. P. Luyten ◽  
J. Vanrenterghem ◽  
...  

Background:The personal and societal burden of knee osteoarthritis (KOA) urges the research community to identify factors that predict its onset and progression. A mechanistic understanding of disease is currently lacking but needed to develop targeted interventions. Traditionally, risk factors for KOA are termed ‘local’ to the joint or ‘systemic’ referring to whole-body systems. There are however clear indications in the scientific literature that contextual factors such as socioeconomic position merit further scientific scrutiny, in order to justify a more biopsychosocial view on risk factors in KOA.Objectives:The aims of this systematic literature review were to assess the inclusion of socioeconomic factors in KOA research and to identify the impact of socioeconomic factors on pain and function in KOA.Methods:Major bibliographic databases, namely Medline, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science and Cochrane, were independently screened by two reviewers (plus one to resolve conflicts) to identify research articles dealing with socioeconomic factors in the KOA population without arthroplasty. Included studies had to quantify the relationship between socioeconomic factors and pain or function. Main exclusion criteria were: a qualitative design, subject age below 16 years and articles not written in English or Dutch. Methodological quality was assessed via the Cochrane risk of bias tools for randomized (ROB-II) and non-randomized intervention studies (ROBIN-I) and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for assessing the quality of non-randomised studies. Due to heterogeneity of studies with respect to outcomes assessed and analyses performed, no meta-analysis was performed.Results:Following de-duplication, 7639 articles were available for screening (120 conflicts resolved without a third reader). In 4112 articles, the KOA population was confirmed. 1906 (25%) were excluded because of knee arthroplasty and 1621 (21%) because of other issues related to the population definition. Socioeconomic factors could not be identified in 4058 (53%) papers and were adjusted for in 211 (3%) articles. In the remaining papers covering pain (n=110) and/or function (n=81), education (62%) and race (37%) were most frequently assessed as socioeconomic factors. A huge variety of mainly dichotomous or ordinal socioeconomic outcomes was found without further methodological justification nor sensitivity analysis to unravel the impact of selected categories. Although the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) was the most popular instrument to assess pain and function, data pooling was not possible as socioeconomic factors estimates were part of multilevel models in most studies. Overall results showed that lower education and African American race were consistent predictors of pain and poor function, but those effects diminished or disappeared when psychological aspects (e.g. discrimination) or poverty estimates were taken into account. When function was assessed using self-reported outcomes, the impact of socioeconomic factors was more clear versus performance-based instruments. Quality of research was low to moderate and the moderating or mediating impact of socioeconomic factors on intervention effects in KOA is understudied.Conclusion:Research on contextual socioeconomic factors in KOA is insufficiently addressed and their assessment is highly variable methodologically. Following this systematic literature review, we can highlight the importance of implementing a standardised and feasible set of socioeconomic outcomes in KOA trials1, as well as the importance of public availability of research databases including these factors. Future research should prioritise the underlying mechanisms in the effect of especially education and race on pain and function and assess its impact on intervention effects to fuel novel (non-)pharmacological approaches in KOA.References:[1]Smith TO et al. The OMERACT-OARSI Core Domain Set for Measurement in Clinical Trials of Hip and/or Knee Osteoarthritis J Rheumatol 2019. 46:981–9.Disclosure of Interests:None declared.


2020 ◽  
Vol 13 (11) ◽  
pp. 400
Author(s):  
Arnold G. Vulto ◽  
Jackie Vanderpuye-Orgle ◽  
Martin van der Graaff ◽  
Steven R. A. Simoens ◽  
Lorenzo Dagna ◽  
...  

Introduction: Biosimilars have the potential to enhance the sustainability of evolving health care systems. A sustainable biosimilars market requires all stakeholders to balance competition and supply chain security. However, there is significant variation in the policies for pricing, procurement, and use of biosimilars in the European Union. A modified Delphi process was conducted to achieve expert consensus on biosimilar market sustainability in Europe. Methods: The priorities of 11 stakeholders were explored in three stages: a brainstorming stage supported by a systematic literature review (SLR) and key materials identified by the participants; development and review of statements derived during brainstorming; and a facilitated roundtable discussion. Results: Participants argued that a sustainable biosimilar market must deliver tangible and transparent benefits to the health care system, while meeting the needs of all stakeholders. Key drivers of biosimilar market sustainability included: (i) competition is more effective than regulation; (ii) there should be incentives to ensure industry investment in biosimilar development and innovation; (iii) procurement processes must avoid monopolies and minimize market disruption; and (iv) principles for procurement should be defined by all stakeholders. However, findings from the SLR were limited, with significant gaps on the impact of different tender models on supply risks, savings, and sustainability. Conclusions: A sustainable biosimilar market means that all stakeholders benefit from appropriate and reliable access to biological therapies. Failure to care for biosimilar market sustainability may impoverish biosimilar development and offerings, eventually leading to increased cost for health care systems and patients, with fewer resources for innovation.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document