MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Rural Economic Development: A Review of the Literature from Industrialized Economies

2010· review· en· W2120875274 on OpenAlexaff
Laura Ryser, Greg Halseth

Bibliographic record

VenueGeography Compass · 2010
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Northern British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEconomic restructuringEconomic growthContext (archaeology)RestructuringRural economicsCorporate governancePolitical scienceRural areaEconomic impact analysisDevelopment economicsRural developmentGeographyEconomicsAgriculture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Over the past 30 years, accelerating change has been one of the defining attributes of rural landscapes around the world. In response, there has been an increasing volume of rural economic development research and public/policy interest in that research. The purpose of this review article is not to provide a ‘state of the literature’ summary, but rather to highlight thematic directions, opportunities, and trends in the rural economic development literature over the past decade in industrialized economies. We review many of the longstanding research themes in rural economic development research: social and economic restructuring, barriers and challenges to economic development, community economic development, community capacity, governance, and policies and programs. We also explore a range of research issues that have (re‐) emerged over the past decade focusing on new approaches to understanding rural change and the deployment of development strategies in the context of the new rural economy.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0080.015
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.245
Teacher spread0.224 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations62
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGeography CompassSame topicRural development and sustainabilityFrench-language works237,207