Consumption systems: Unveiling bi‐residential and delegated consumption
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Based on an exploratory study of 29 semi‐structured interviews followed by a grounded theory analysis, this research explores the circulation of local products and brands enacted by bi‐residential consumers with geographically dispersed networks across two places. The results show that two new consumption systems are emerging at the frontier between conventional and collaborative consumption: bi‐residential and delegated consumption. In these two consumption systems, the bi‐residential consumer mediates the relationship between the retailer and the final consumer, thus informally extending the retailer's downstream value chain. Bi‐residential and delegated systems partly overlap but also differ from conventional or collaborative consumption systems in two ways: (a) they are linked in a modelized process sustained by the perception of ‘access’ and the ‘logistic role’ of the bi‐residential consumer; (b) they are embedded in a hybrid exchange system intertwining gift‐giving and monetary exchange. These consumption systems occur at the interstice between conventional and collaborative consumption. Local retailers and brands could benefit from knowledge in this area with a view to opening up new opportunities in value co‐creation with bi‐residential consumers.
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 | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".