¿Y después de la neoliberalización? Estrategias metodológicas para la investigación de las transformaciones regulatorias contemporáneas / After Neoliberalization? Methodological Strategies for the Investigation of Contemporary Regulatory Transformations.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ResumenEl presente ensayo ofrece un marco teórico para el análisis de los procesos de reestructuración regulatoria del capitalismo contemporáneo, tomando como trasfondo los debates sobre los orígenes y consecuencias de la crisis económica global de 2008-2009. El análisis se articula en torno al concepto de neoliberalización, que consideramos esencial para comprender las transformaciones regulatorias de nuestra época. Comenzamos con una serie de definiciones aclaratorias que refuerzan nuestra conceptualización de la neoliberalización como un proceso abigarrado, geográficamente desigual y dependiente de una trayectoria previa (path-dependent). Sobre esta base, distinguimos tres dimensiones en los procesos de neoliberalización: la experimentación regulatoria, la transferencia de políticas interjurisdiccionales y la formación de regímenes normativos transnacionales. Tales distinciones conforman la base de una periodización esquemática que explica cómo los procesos de neoliberalización se han consolidado en varios niveles espaciales y extendido por toda la economía mundial desde la década de los ochenta. Asimismo, proporcionan una perspectiva analítica desde la que explorar diversos escenarios para las formas de reestructuración regulatoria contra-neoliberalizadoras. Pese a que nuestro análisis no aborda directamente los efectos que dichas transformaciones regulatorias tienen sobre paisajes urbanos particulares, el ensayo concluye subrayando alguna de las implicaciones que aquéllas pueden tener para los actuales esfuerzos por descifrar estos últimos.Palabras clave: Neoliberalización, contra-neoliberalización, experimentos regulatorios, transferencia de políticas, regímenes normativos.AbstractAgainst the background of debates on the origins and implications of the global economic crisis of 2008-2009, this essay presents a theoretical framework for analyzing processes of regulatory restructuring under contemporary capitalism. The analysis is framed around the concept of neoliberalization, which we view as a keyword for understanding the regulatory transformations of our time. We begin with a series of definitional clarifications that underpin our conceptualization of neoliberalization as a variegated, geographically uneven and path dependent process. On this basis, we distinguish three dimensions of neoliberalization processes—regulatory experimentation; inter-jurisdictional policy transfer; and the formation of transnational rule-regimes. Such distinctions form the basis for a schematic periodization of how neoliberalization processes have been entrenched at various spatial scales and extended across the world economy since the 1980s. They also generate an analytical perspective from which to explore several scenarios for counter-neoliberalizing forms of regulatory restructuring. While our analysis does not directly consider the effects of these regulatory transformations on particular urban landscapes, we conclude by outlining some of its implications for ongoing efforts to decipher the latter. Keywords: Neoliberalization, counter-neoliberalization, regulatory experiments, policy transfer, rule regimes.
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 | 0.019 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".