The Growing Economic Specialization of Cities: Disentangling Industrial and Functional Dimensions in the <scp>C</scp>anadian Urban System, 1971–2006
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
Abstract Decreasing spatial transaction and trade costs have given rise to growing economic specialization of cities. While most studies focus on industries as the primary manifestation of urban specialization, a growing body of literature examines occupational functions, i.e., activities and tasks performed within a given industry or firm. This paper explores how the two dimensions (industries and functions) interact across the urban system and their relative importance over time. Is there a trend toward increasing functional specialization in the C anadian urban system? How much of this phenomenon is attributable to spatial shifts in regional industrial structures as opposed to spatial divisions within industries? The paper uses a unique data set drawn from Statistics C anada Census microdata files between 1971 and 2006. Based on the employed population, the data are spatially organized and cross‐tabulated over industries and occupational groups. A decomposition methodology is used to compare the relative weights of industry and regional (functional) effects in accounting for the changing spatial division of functions across C anadian urban areas. Clear patterns of increasing functional specialization are found within the C anadian urban system. Regional effects are generally greater than industry effects, suggesting that spatial divisions of functions (spatial shifts within industries) are progressing more rapidly than regional shifts in industrial structure.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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