MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3128758719 · doi:10.1111/cag.12674

Coming into fashion: Expanding the entrepreneurial ecosystem concept to the creative industries through a Toronto case study

2021· article· en· W3128758719 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Taylor Brydges, Rhiannon Pugh

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipCreative industriesVariety (cybernetics)Function (biology)Perspective (graphical)Focus (optics)MarketingBusinessEconomic geographyKnowledge managementSociologyEconomicsPolitical scienceComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper considers the entrepreneurial ecosystem concept, which in recent years has gained interest from a variety of perspectives including entrepreneurship, management, and economic geography. Specifically, the paper identifies a gap in the literature regarding the concept's sectoral or industrial focus. Prior applications to real‐world case studies have focused on a fairly narrow range of industries and places. In this paper, we apply the concept to a case study of one creative and cultural industry, the fashion industry, to help us understand not only the performance and function of entrepreneurs and small businesses in this industries, but also potential policy supports. We map the institutions and spaces in Toronto's entrepreneurial ecosystem, drawing on extensive qualitative research to consider the dynamics and interactions therein. In parallel, we advance the concept theoretically, questioning its tenability and applicability in a wider range of economic systems by adding the perspective of cultural and creative industries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.202
Threshold uncertainty score0.406

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0130.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations25
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207