Bibliographic record
Abstract
The rise of market logics and the spread of neoliberal policies over the past couple of decades have led to resistance and countermobilization efforts by a variety of activists and concerned citizens—recall the vivid 1999 World Trade Organization (WTO) protests in Seattle. However, contemporary modernity is more complicated than such simple movement—countermovement imageries, and instead of witnessing a leveling of previous institutional configurations with new market-oriented ones, the blending or coexistence of multiple competing and/or complementary logics has become de rigeuer. Hence, in some cases, market logics can provide a foundation for action that supports the arguments and interests of those who stand opposed on principle to market creep. Highlighting how the environmental movement has come to embrace the market as well as activism via an exploration of student eco-entrepreneurship in university settings, we argue that both researchers and skeptics need to go beyond ideological commitments to appreciate the complicated diversity of action and empirical reality that exists at the interface of business and society.
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 | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.028 | 0.044 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.003 |
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".