The rise of portuguese multinational enterprises (1980-2005)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper tries to make an assessment about the process of formation of Portuguese multinationals during the last quarter of century in the context of similar small emerging European economies. The main question to be addressed is how much Portuguese peculiarities shaped the transnationalization process of the Portuguese economy in a different way, when compared to other European economies of similar size, which have also undergone the modem economic growth process during the second half of the 20th century and the privatization process during the last quarter of century. The text focus on the consequences of two relevant facts for the Portuguese transnationalization process: the relative backwardness of Portugal, a latecomer to modem economic growth (a post WW II development, which only matured very recently along the terciarization process); the gradual evolution from import substitution policies (which protected firms from international competition and, eventually, made them less competitive abroad in the long run) to export-led growth. At the same time, the paper tries to identify the typical expansion strategies of active transnationalisation, while the main cases of Portuguese multinational firms will be reviewed and put in the context of the ranking of the World multinationals.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".