MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3199654250 · doi:10.3390/jrfm14090438

Sustainability Determinants of Cultural and Creative Industries in Peripheral Areas

2021· article· en· W3199654250 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Francesca Imperiale, Roberta Fasiello, Stefano Adamo

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of risk and financial management · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityScope (computer science)Context (archaeology)Dimension (graph theory)Sustainable developmentPerspective (graphical)Creative industriesBusinessRegional scienceEconomic geographyMarketingPolitical scienceGeographyComputer scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cultural and Creative Industries (CCIs) are increasingly recognized as part of the global economy and of growing importance for sustainable local development. However, the exploitation of their full potential depends on several issues concerning their entrepreneurial dimension and the context where they operate. The paper deals with these issues having the scope to investigate the main determinants of CCIs’ sustainability in peripheral areas, to understand what kind of policy could better support the survival of CCIs and development in these areas, according to an end-user perspective. The research is part of an Interreg Greece-Italy project carried out from mid-2018 until the end of 2020 with specific reference to CCIs in Apulia (IT) and Western Greece (EL). A two-step mixed methodology has been used to figure out regional specializations and the specific aspects of the entrepreneurial structure and business sustainability in the cultural and creative sector (CCs). In the end, the paper shows and discusses the main determinants considered crucial for CCI sustainability, suggesting guidelines for local authorities supporting their economic development.

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)0.001
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 score0.437
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations30
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of risk and financial managementSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207