Le rôle grandissant et la diversité des formes de communs pour la production et la préservation des biens et services essentiels
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The theme of the commons is meeting a growing interest in the economics and management literature as well as other disciplines such as sociology and philosophy (Dardot & Laval, 2014, for example).This interest can be explained by theoretical advances but also by the development of multifaceted practices that aim not only to initiate new forms of governance but also the deployment of activities making it possible to offer open and shared access to common goods.With its long tradition of studying organizations and forms of governance serving the collective interest in the field of public economy and social economy, CIRIEC is part of this process of promoting theoretical and practices advances that can contribute to a beneficial deployment of the commons and public goods.A book on the joint production of public goods and commons (CIRIEC, Bance, 2018), and the CIRIEC research conference on social economy held in Bucharest in 2019 conducted recently such analyses.This special issue of APCE is a continuation of this research by focusing in particular on the question of the variety of commons dedicated to open and shared access to essential goods and services. THE GROWING IMPORTANCE OF THE TOPIC OF THE COMMONSAccording to Coriat (2020), the SARS-Cov2 pandemic is not just any pandemic, a rare event in the image of the famous "black swan" or those crises which, as we are told, only occur once a century.On the contrary, it confirms that we are entering a new era, the Anthropocene, in which health crises and climate change will become part of the daily life of humanity.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".