MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081227551 · doi:10.5539/ibr.v13n9p101

Between Tradition and Sustainable Innovation: Empirical Evidence for the Role of Geographical Indications

2020· article· en· W3081227551 on OpenAlex
Alessandro Gocci, Christoph Luetge, Hristos Vakoufaris

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Business Research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicRural development and sustainability
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilitySelection (genetic algorithm)Product (mathematics)Triple bottom lineBusinessMarketingEmpirical researchEmpirical evidenceContent analysisIndustrial organizationRegional scienceSociologyComputer scienceSocial scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The role of innovation without disrupting tradition is gaining importance within GI research. Next to maintaining competitiveness within niche markets, the topic of sustainability is put into focus by different GI stakeholders. This paper aims to shed light on the combination of tradition and innovation and their effects on long-term sustainability. A new framework was developed combining the concept of a GI entrepreneur, the TISyn model, and the Triple-Bottom line. It can be used for holistic research of GI agricultural productions while focusing not only on economic factors but also on social and environmental ones. Three protected designations of origin (PDO) products were researched as case studies using the framework: Stromberger Pflaume (Germany), Carciofo Spinoso di Sardegna (Italy), and Vlaams Brabantse tafeldruif (Belgium). The selection of these cases was based on a qualitative content analysis of GI documents, with the possibility of comparing different national and institutional contexts, while using products belonging to the same product class (fruits and vegetables). Furthermore, the selection was refined by the available empirical material and the willingness and ability of GI stakeholders to engage in topics investigated here. The comparative case study approach allows us to qualitatively assess differences between the dimensions of sustainability within different contexts. Thus, it will help build a new theory around the synergy of tradition and innovation within the GI scheme. The results can support new GI policy designs and their implementation, which may benefit all the GI stakeholders in the long-run.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.134
Threshold uncertainty score0.290

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.209
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.186 · 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