MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2018663764 · doi:10.1016/j.polsoc.2010.07.003

Reflections on the evolving landscape of social enterprise in North America

2010· article· en· W2018663764 on OpenAlexaff
Marguerite Mendell

Bibliographic record

VenuePolicy and Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommercializationMarketizationCivil societyContext (archaeology)Welfare stateCorporatismSociologyPolitical economyPolitical scienceEconomic systemEconomicsPublic administrationPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Social enterprises, at least in the United States, internalize a hybrid mix of public, private and civil society activity, each and all of which are constituent and confluent. Is social enterprise re-embedding the market in civil society through its engagement to generate social wealth, or is it contributing to a process of dis-embedding, as a market-based approach to address societal issues imposes a strategy of commercialization? Simply asking this question demonstrates how difficult it is to capture this phenomenon in a homogeneous “new welfare mix” paradigm that realigns state, market and civil society relations. Not only do national contexts matter, but degrees of marketization or commercialization do as well. This article provides a broad overview of social enterprise in the North American context. In examining the literature on social enterprise, one navigates through a lexicon of numerous terms and definitions.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.143
Threshold uncertainty score0.285

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0170.022
Scholarly communication0.0110.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.270 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations46
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePolicy and SocietySame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207