MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410923323 · doi:10.5539/res.v17n1p50

How European Governance Shapes Entrepreneurial Ecosystems to Unlock SME Innovation

2025· article· en· W4410923323 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alberto Bettanti

Bibliographic record

VenueReview of European Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessIndustrial organizationEntrepreneurshipEconomic geographyEconomic systemEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to analyze the influence of public governance on the effectiveness of European supranational public policies in fostering innovation within innovation ecosystems (IEs), specifically through the lens of the PITCCH initiative, a European innovation project funded by Horizon 2020 under the 'Innovation in SMEs' measure. Utilizing a 10-month ethnographic field study, this research examines how public governance mechanisms provide targeted, results-oriented support to IEs, with a particular focus on innovation-driven small and medium enterprises (i-SMEs). The findings reveal that public governance plays a critical role in facilitating the interaction between i-SMEs and larger ecosystem stakeholders, thereby enhancing the innovative capacity and market value of i-SMEs.This research contributes valuable insights into how public governance strategies can be effectively deployed to stimulate economic and scientific growth within IEs, offering practical guidance for policymakers and implications for future policy development. The also contributes to academic discourse by providing empirical evidence on the nuanced roles of public governance within European supranational contexts.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.364
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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 venueReview of European StudiesSame topicRegional Development and PolicyFrench-language works237,207