Diverse Regions: Building Resilient Communities and Territories 2014 Regional Studies Association European Conference, Izmir, Turkey, 15-18 June 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The 2014 Regional Studies Association European Conference took place in Izmir, Turkey, from 15 to 18 of June under the theme 'Diverse regions: building resilient communities and territories'. Against the consensus that building resilient regions is particularly important in the wake of the global economic crisis, the conference sought to present a timely opportunity to discuss the issues of diversity, variety and resilience to establish the need and nature of future research imperatives, and to address the concerns and challenges confronting policymakers and practitioners. Hosted at the Dokuz Eylul University, Izmir, Turkey, the three-day conference had a strong emphasis on policy and practice, particularly related to the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development's (OECD) agenda for stronger, cleaner and fairer economies and the European Union (EU) 2020's call for smart, inclusive, sustainable economies. As a 'developing, growing and innovative' non-capital city, Izmir offers a live laboratory to explore the opportunities brought by diversifying its traditional industries, as well as how cities and regions can work to re-imagine their place in the world.Conference organisation and contributionsOnce again, the Regional Studies Association (RSA) kept its high standard in organising the whole event, such as providing shuttle services between the conference venue and accommodation. There was also a good mix of academic participants and policy practitioners from across Europe and internationally, which encouraged interdisciplinary debate related to the broad advancement of regional studies and dialogue between academics and practitioners. The conference had twenty-two gateway themes, as well as fourteen special organised sessions, both of which exceeded the numbers organised at the last European conference (Table 1). In total, there were over 255 papers presented in around sixty sessions. The majority of delegates were from continental Europe and the UK, however there was also a significant international element, with delegates and papers related to China, US, Canada, Nigeria, Cumbria and Brazil among many others. This reflects the dedicated efforts of the Regional Studies Association to expand its global reach, especially towards China and North America. The presence of a large number of delegates from South America reinforced the success of the Association's Global Conference held in Brazil earlier in 2014.Plenary sessionsThree plenary sessions were offered during the conference. The first focused on 'regional studies versus today's challenges'. Plenary speakers included Professor Betsy Donald from the Department of Geography at Queen's University and Professor Ron Boschma, Director of the Centre for Innovation, Research and Competence in the Learning Economy (CIRCLE) at Lund University. The overall tone of the presentations focused on the challenges for regional development in an age of austerity and how regional resilience could be better constructed. Betsy Donald presented worrying pictures on growing government debts and the rising unemployment rates in the EU, US and Canada. She adapted Piketty's inequality story to show that intra-regional inequality was also increasing throughout the world. This led Donald to suggest that taxation on global capital and a scaling up of fragmented local actions were the way forward. Against the setting of economic crisis, Ron Boschma posed the question: 'how does one understand regional resilience from a path dependency perspective?' He suggested that the evolutionary approach to regional resilience was not about the short-term ability of regions to recover from a shock in an equilibrium framework, but about the extent to which a shock affected the long-term ability of regions to develop new growth paths. The three dimensions of industrial variety, networks and institutional changes could all interact with a region's resilience.The plenary session on the second day provided a direct dialogue between academia, practitioners and policymakers on the theme of the EU and Turkey. …
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 | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.043 | 0.008 |
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".