MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409574118 · doi:10.1080/2157930x.2025.2466930

Exploring the business model of innovation spaces: an international analysis of environments for creativity, innovation and development

2025· article· en· W4409574118 on OpenAlexaff
Jose Montes, Aglaya Batz, Utz Dornberger, Ivan Camilo Velasquez

Bibliographic record

VenueInnovation and Development · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
FundersMinistério da Ciência, Tecnologia e InovaçãoWorld Bank Group
KeywordsCreativityBusinessKnowledge managementBusiness modelEconomic geographyIndustrial organizationMarketingPolitical scienceEconomicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A variety of physical spaces exist to foster creative activities as well as the development of innovations by offering solutions to complex problems: Social Labs, Makerspaces, Hackerspaces, Idea Labs, among others. Despite their growing relevance in the innovation ecosystem, it is difficult to differentiate their business model and value proposition. This paper addresses this difficulty by exploring the elements that characterize the business model domains of innovation spaces. Through qualitative web content analysis, we studied 87 spaces located in eleven countries, with a focus on Colombia. We found that the value proposition among these spaces can be focused on: education, prototyping and experimentation, solving social problems, and fostering entrepreneurship and innovation. This study expands our understanding of innovation spaces, value proposition, communication channels and revenue streams. Moreover, it theorizes about the relationships and dynamics between innovation spaces, co-creation, and value proposition through a framework developed inductively.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.868
Threshold uncertainty score0.658

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.120
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.169 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInnovation and DevelopmentSame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207