The Ignored Legitimation Paradox of Northern Technology-based New Ventures Encountering Southern Contexts: Case Study of a French e-Books Company
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
The contribution of Northern technologies to solving problems in the South is widely studied. However, the dissemination of these technologies in the South is rarely seen as a legitimacy issue. This paper aims to understand how the legitimacy of a new venture is created in an emerging field, considering the indeterminate and unstable nature of the entrepreneurial process. To explore this avenue, we conducted a qualitative study around a unique case: Cyberlibris, a young company operating in the field of e-books, an emerging field within the book industry in the early 2000s. This study suggests that the process of legitimation of a disruptive technology-based innovation carried out by a newcomer is constituted by a tangle of tests, a notion borrowed from pragmatic sociology, but tests change with respect to demands by African schools. First, we highlight three tests within the legitimacy process in the French context (revenue model, publisher conservatism and reading practice changes). These tests are experienced by adapting to the African context. We discuss the paradox between legitimacy and domination in technology appropriation processes.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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