MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Options for Moving beyond the Canonical Model of Regional Path Dependence

2011· article· en· W1704203702 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Urban and Regional Research · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicRegional Economics and Spatial Analysis
Canadian institutionsBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPath dependenceContext (archaeology)SociologyContingencyMathematical economicsWelfare economicsEpistemologyHumanitiesPositive economicsGeographyMathematicsEconomicsNeoclassical economicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Ron Martin's recent critique of the canonical model of regional path dependence constitutes a significant original contribution to evolutionary economic geography, and is likely to open up a whole new range of promising directions of theoretical debate and empirical research. In the first part of my commentary, I highlight and discuss the following two assumptions implicit in his work: (1) broader and less restrictive models are better than narrow and restrictive ones; and (2) economic geographers are better served by a model that emphasizes change than by one that emphasizes continuity. In the second part of my commentary, I suggest that Martin's own alternative model could be further developed by: (1) replacing the binary distinction between ‘path as movement to stable state’ and ‘path as dynamic process’ with a continuum; (2) avoiding, with the help of mereology, the hasty generalization to regional economies of processes of change originally theorized in the context of institutions; and (3) tracing the implications for evolutionary economic geography of the recent analytical work on contingency — a hitherto under‐theorized concept that has been central to evolutionary reasoning in general, and to the problematic of lock‐ins in particular. Résumé La récente critique du modèle canonique des sentiers de dépendance régionaux qu’a présentée Ron Martin constitue un apport original important pour la géographie économique évolutionniste, laissant présager de nouvelles orientations prometteuses pour le débat théorique et la recherche empirique. La première partie de ce commentaire souligne et analyse deux hypothèses implicites dans son travail: les modèles généraux et peu contraignants sont meilleurs que les modèles limités et restrictifs; les géographes économiques ont intérêt à utiliser un modèle qui s’attache au changement plutôt qu’à la continuité. Dans la seconde partie, il est suggéré que le modèle de Martin pourrait lui‐même être développé selon trois axes: remplacer par un phénomène continu la perspective binaire du sentier vu soit ‘comme un mouvement vers un état stable’, soit ‘comme un processus dynamique’; en s’appuyant sur la méréologie, éviter de généraliser hâtivement aux économies régionales les processus de changement conçus à l’origine dans le cadre d’institutions; repérer comment la géographie économique évolutionniste peut être affectée par les récents travaux analytiques sur la contingence — notion peu théorisée jusqu’ici, mais centrale pour la logique évolutionniste en général, et la problématique des blocages ( lock‐ins ) en particulier.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.189
Threshold uncertainty score0.306

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.241
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.092 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it