New Ventures' Export Orientation: Outcome and Source of Knowledge Spillovers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper we draw on knowledge spillover literature to suggest that a country’s proportion of exportoriented new ventures, compared to its total number of new ventures, represents an outcome of knowledge spillovers (export spillovers) that stem from foreign direct investment (FDI) and international trade, as well as a source of knowledge spillovers (entrepreneurship spillovers) that positively influence the country’s total level of entrepreneurial activity. We distinguish between higher-income and lower-income countries, because the latter are less integrated into the world economy. To test the hypotheses, we use macro-level data from 34 countries during the period 2002–2005. After controlling for relevant factors such as size of the domestic market and industry structure, we find that the relationship between FDI and international trade on the one hand and a country’s proportion of export-oriented new ventures on the other differs for higherand lower-income countries. In addition, a country’s proportion of export-oriented new ventures affects the subsequent emergence of new businesses. These findings have important implications for research and practice. This is an update of paper H200619.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".