The Geographies of Knowledge Transfers over Distance: Toward a Typology
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the globalizing knowledge economy firms have become less reliant on local production and market networks and increasingly expand their reach to an international or global scale. The argument of this paper suggests that this has given rise to distinct geographies of knowledge transfers over distance, which rely on periodic or regular temporary face-to-face contacts. While some of these settings of temporary knowledge transfers have existed for a long time, they are now being intensively applied throughout the economy. In this paper we develop a typology of these geographies based on three dimensions that characterize the conditions for knowledge exchange: (i) framing, (ii) cognitive focus and goals, and (iii) trust and risks involved. Based on these variables, we identify three configurations and eight subcategories of knowledge transfers that build upon temporary face-to-face interaction, classified as (1) international community gatherings, (2) international business travel, and (3) transnational network relations. Systematic comparison reveals that with growing uncertainty in economic interaction and with increasing commitment between the agents, trust-based linkages tend to become more important, and the number of interacting agents declines, while the frequency of temporary face-to-face meetings increases.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it