Développement territorial et innovation sociale : l’apport polanyien
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="resume" dir="ltr">S’inspirant de concepts mis de l’avant par Karl Polanyi, nous présentons une analyse renouvelée de la notion d’innovation sociale. Le renouvellement permet de bien distinguer les dimensions sociale et politique présentes dans le processus innovant. Il permet aussi d’établir une relation entre l’appropriation d’une innovation et sa localisation dans un territoire donné. Enfin, reprenant l’intuition polanyienne du double mouvement de construction du vivre ensemble, entre une tendance hégémonique et un kaléidoscope de propositions contre hégémoniques, nous indiquons en quoi et comment le processus d’innovation est une voie de transformation plus réformiste que révolutionnaire des sociétés.</p><p class="abstract" dir="ltr">Using concepts elaborated by Karl Polanyi, we present a new way of analyzing the concept of social innovation. In doing so, it is possible to distinguish the social and political dimensions of innovative processes. This also permits us to create a link between the appropriation of an innovation and its localization in a specific territory. Finally, in revisiting the double movement concept of production of “living together”, between a hegemonic tendency and a kaleidoscope of counter hegemonic propositions, we indicated in which way and how the innovative process is more a reformist way of transformation than a revolutionary path of societal evolution.</p>
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 teacher head, 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".