Sage Publications Los Angeles/London/New Delhi/Singapore DOI: 10.1177/000944550604300102 A Study of the Tibetan Rural Urbanisation Model∗
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Urbanisation is the inevitable outcome of world economic development and an unavoidable stage, as also an important factor, promoting and boosting economic development across the world. There are two objectives of this article—to reveal the specific features of Tibetan urbanisation as Tibet is located on ‘the roof of the world ’ with its unique natural, historical and cultural features. The specific features of Tibetan urbanisation can be summarised as low urbanisation when compared to world urbanisation levels, a low starting point and a different background of urbanisation and little urbanisation motiv-ation. The second purpose is to examine whether Mcgee’s Desakota model has some relevance in terms of comprehending Tibetan rural urbanisation. The established theories of urbanisation are mainly based on western urbanisation experiences. Proceeding from the city as the centre and economic relations as the basis, western scholars believe that with the metropolitan’s advantage of accumulating economy and its comparative benefits, the countryside will naturally be transformed into a city. With the beginnings of urbanisation in the developing countries, many new phenomena and trends, specific to these countries have also appeared in the pro-cess. Consequently, conventional western theories of urbanisation have come under the scanner. In 1987, Canadian scholar T. G. Mcgee formulated the ‘Desakota ’ model. Of Indonesian origin, Kota means city or town, while Desa means countryside. Mcgee argues that in the economic zones of some Asian developing countries and areas,
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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 teacher head, 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".