From an Orthodox to an Emerging Revisionist View of Necessity Entrepreneurship
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This introduction offers a revisionist view of necessity entrepreneurship (NE). The volume editors are thereby challenging orthodox perspectives that equate NE solely with financial poverty and lack of employment and self-sustenance alternatives. Rather, a more nuanced understanding of NE as encompassing cognitive, communal, and institutional processes aimed at coping with various dimensions of necessity is needed. The editors encourage moving beyond solely individualistic accounts to theorize NE as an emergent property of social systems and a source of novel social structures. The editors further outline how this volume aims to expand our collective understanding of NE by theorizing it more holistically and make a plea to break new theoretical and methodological ground. The introduction then introduces the volume’s five sections, which propose new ways of seeing, theorizing, and researching NE. These sections cover: (1) moving toward a new heterodoxy in NE research, (2) examining necessity entrepreneurs’ cognitive processes, (3) exploring poverty and informality perspectives, (4) adopting institutional views, and (5) showcasing novel methodological approaches. The editors hope that by challenging existing paradigms and proposing new conceptual frameworks, this volume can help advance our understanding of NE and lay the groundwork for future work in the field.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| 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".