Social innovation and the promotion of local economic development
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this study is to propose a multidimensional view of social innovation. Design/methodology/approach It offers a detailed analysis of the activities performed by ADEL (Agência de Desenvolvimento Econômico Local) – a regional non-governmental organization located in one of the poorest regions of Brazil – which is succeeding in engaging young people in the promotion of local development. The case was analysed drawing on the dimensions structured by researchers of one of the main centres of social innovation in the world, the Centre de Recherche sur Les Innovations Sociales (CRISES) based in Canada. Findings The results found characterize ADEL as a social innovation based on the dimensions of social innovation described in the CRISES’ conceptual encyclopaedia (Tardif and Harrison, 2005). The results highlight the singularities of the case studied, which allowed the elaboration of a revisited table of dimensions proposed by the CRISES’ researchers. Research limitations/implications For future studies, using the CRISES’ table as reference of analysis for other social innovations, the possibility suggested is the quantitative exploration of these dimensions. Originality/value The originality of this article lies in the fact that it presents a representative social innovation for the Brazilian semiarid.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".