Política regional y regiones en un proceso de integración económica: el caso de la CEE
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
En el presente trabajo se pretende ofrecer un panorama general de los problemas fundamentales de las regiones europeas y las respuestas de política que se han dado en el ámbito nacional -de cada estado miembro- y, desde los años setenta, en el nivel comunitario. Se supone que el conocimiento de las experiencias europeas con todas sus peculiaridades pueden resultar útiles para otros procesos de integración económica como el que se inicia en México actualmente con el Tratado de Libre Comercio. Es interesante observar que tras la crisis de los setenta, la política regional difiere de la concepción tradicional. La restructuración industrial y sus repercusiones en la organización de la firma y en la intervención de los poderes públicos, los desarrollos tecnológicos y los procesos de globalización de la economía sitúan la "cuestión regional" en una perspectiva diferente. Sin embargo, la comunidad intensifica su apoyo a las regiones menos desarrolladas con el reforzamiento de los fondos estructurales.ABSTRACTThis article describes a key underlying dilemma in European regional politics--growth and/or equity—and the more general responses that the governments of member states and of the European Community itself, through its Structural Funds, have advanced to mitigate the differentials in development among regions. The author argues that our understanding of the European experience during the integration process can be applied (despite geographic distances) to other processes, including Mexico's current negotiations toward a free trade agreement with Canada and the United Stales. One fundamental conclusion can be drawn from the European experience: integration alone cannot resolve the problems of the weakest regions. As a result, regional policies, which can offer a new focus and new perspectives, continue to be an indispensable prerequisite in the integration process.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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