MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2608667692 · doi:10.1111/gec3.12311

The contemporary geographies of craft‐based manufacturing

2017· article· en· W2608667692 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueGeography Compass · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCraftProduction (economics)NormativeClothingEconomic geographySociologyVisual artsPolitical scienceGeographyArtEconomicsArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper reviews the literature on craft production to explore the ways in which the normative landscape of craft is affecting the contemporary geographies of craft‐based manufacturing. Craft forms of production have enjoyed a revival in recent decades in what is now called the “third‐wave” craft movement. In this paper, I consider the origins and characteristics of third‐wave craft as well as its historical precedents. I highlight 3 distinct geographies associated with contemporary craft‐based manufacturing, including a fusion of industrial and cultural production in industrial workspaces, a relocalization of small‐scale industrial production in advanced economies, and a tendency towards spatial agglomeration in both urban and rural areas. Drawing on the case of the American craft‐brewing sector, I offer a picture of these distinct geographies in a representative manufacturing industry and highlight the need to consider the ways in which craft production and articulations of its values manifest differently in different industries. Finally, I conclude by offering reflections on the landscape of craft‐based manufacturing and potential avenues for future geographical engagements with craft production.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.386
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.242 · 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