Place marketing, policy integration and governance complexity: an analytical framework for FDI promotion
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
This paper focuses on the marketing of regions and cities within the global market for foreign direct investments (FDIs). In a context in which place marketing and place branding are employed as tools for local and regional development, this paper aims to discuss, within the broader place marketing and branding discourse, the extent to which FDI promotion has evolved in pursuit of the relative economic prosperity of local communities. In so doing, this paper investigates the evolution of FDI promotion and its degree of integration with diverse local policy domains. The cases of Ontario (Canada), Tuscany (Italy) and Western Switzerland are taken as illustrative examples of the intertwining of the three dimensions that this paper identifies as fundamental to the analysis of FDI promotion, namely (a) FDI policy generation, (b) the relationship of place branding and place marketing and (c) governance complexity. In light of the results, the relation between FDI promotion and strategic planning is discussed, by drawing attention to critical aspects of policy integration.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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