MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W620305940

Servicification of European manufacturing : evidence from Swedish micro level data

2010· article· en· W620305940 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Magnus Lodefalk

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicGlobal trade and economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessDiversification (marketing strategy)NegotiationManufacturingIndustrial organizationMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

European manufacturing seems to servicify - use and sell more services - but knowledge is poor. We illuminate the phenomenon using detailed and comprehensive micro level data at both the firm and enterprise group level for Sweden (1997-2006). We find that manufacturing is servicifying substantially. On the input side, services and qualified services are increasingly characterising in-house activity in manufacturing. On the output side, manufacturing's share of services sales in total sales is up as well as services exports. Moreover, we show that services sales are much greater (almost 60 percent higher) when all activities in manufacturing's enterprise groups are considered. This has not been shown for a European country before. It means that when we consider enterprise groups, the large discrepancy in manufacturing's services diversification between Canada and the EUcountries vanishes, at the least for Sweden. The results imply that treating services and manufacturing separately - e.g. in EU’s trade negotiations - may be out of date. Finally, the findings illustrate the value of enterprise group level data when studying structural economic changes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.040
Threshold uncertainty score0.079

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.002

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 head0.290
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.036 · 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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicGlobal trade and economics→French-language works237,207→