MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2804602858 · doi:10.1177/0308518x18776327

Planting the seed to grow local creative industries: The impacts of cultural districts and arts schools on economic development

2018· article· en· W2804602858 on OpenAlexaff
Shiri M. Breznitz, Douglas S. Noonan

Bibliographic record

VenueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and Space · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoGlobal Affairs Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsThe artsIntermediaryCreative industriesDigital mediaSociologyAccreditationCultural economicsEconomic growthMarketingPolitical scienceBusinessVisual artsEconomicsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The impact of arts and culture on local economies has been studied extensively. However, a review of the literature finds conflicting and critical results regarding the impact of cultural on economic outcomes. In this paper, we shift attention to examine different intermediaries and concentrations of cultural agents that can influence growth and innovation in the “creative economy.” Thus, we build on previous work and expand on it by refining the scale of analysis (zip-code level). The paper focuses on education in the arts and digital media in all arts-related programs at universities as well as accredited art schools across the United States. Further, employing more observations for larger cities allows a richer depiction of the rather urban nature of the arts and digital media industries. We find that, by going to the zip-code level, we can say that both districts and arts programs (especially at schools that specialize in arts education) have a positive relationship with the share of jobs in the arts and digital media. Moreover, when we evaluate the impact of schools versus districts, we find that schools have a greater role.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.620
Threshold uncertainty score0.694

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.221 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations13
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnvironment and Planning A Economy and SpaceSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207