Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article examines the evolution of New York City from a low‐end, high‐volume apparel manufacturing hub to an international fashion capital. Drawing on evolutionary economic theories of path‐dependence, it argues that New York City's initial specialization in ready‐to‐wear apparel has shaped its subsequent development as a mass‐market oriented industry. At the same time, however, it shows how key institutional actors were able to alter the industry's course of development at critical historical junctures by nurturing and promoting their own local design talent. As such, the article's investigation into New York's ascendance as an international fashion center challenges the dominant interpretation of path‐dependence in regional development theory and practice. It contends that industries are not held captive to past choices and illustrates how an industry's origins can shape but not over‐determine its economic development trajectory. L'article examine l'évolution de la ville de New York, laquelle est passée d'un centre de manufacture industrielle de vêtements bas de gamme à une capitale internationale de la mode. En se basant sur les théories économiques évolutionnaires de path‐dependence, il affirme que la spécialisation initiale de New York dans le prêt‐à‐porter a modelé son évolution ultérieure vers une industrie de masse. Parallèlement, il montre toutefois comment des acteurs institutionnels clés ont modifié le cap de l'expansion industrielle à des moments historiques cruciaux en encourageant leurs talents de création locaux. Ce faisant, l'étude de la suprématie new‐yorkaise en tant que centre international de la mode défie l'interprétation dominante de la ‘dépendance de sentier’ dans la théorie et la pratique du développement régional. En effet, elle soutient que les secteurs d'activité ne sont pas prisonniers des choix passés, et illustre comment les origines d'une industrie peuvent influencer sa trajectoire d'expansion économique sans la déterminer irrésistiblement.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".