MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1518500395

Beyond Compliance: Sustainable Development, Business, and Proactive Law

2015· article· en· W1518500395 on OpenAlexaff
Gerlinde Berger‐Walliser, Paul Shrivastava

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicRegulation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStatus quoSustainable developmentCorporate governanceBusinessCompliance (psychology)Work (physics)Law and economicsPolitical sciencePublic economicsEconomicsLawFinanceEngineering
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Scholarly work shows that the existing legal framework for sustainable development is insufficient, cautious, incremental, and incomplete. Despite public and private efforts to address sustainable development, environmental and social problems and conditions continue to worsen. This Article posits that the status quo is a direct result of the systemic failure to recognize the potential for a synergistic relationship between the private and public sectors to create a comprehensive, yet effective, regulatory framework. Based on an analysis of the current national and international legal framework and alternative regulatory approaches in the “New Governance” literature, this Article aims to engage law, science and sustainable business to determine the best way to develop a governance regime for sustainable development based on “Proactive Law”.

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)0.022
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0220.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0070.051
Scholarly communication0.0130.016
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0080.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations18
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicRegulation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207