Political action through environmental shareholder resolution filing: applicability to Canadian Oil Sands?
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research on the efficacy of social and environmental shareholder resolutions often fails to consider their strategic value in the context of policy outreach. Research on investor-driven governance networks and shareholder activism as a social movement illuminates strategies for organized shareholder coalitions to use a coordinated resolution filing campaign to shape the rules and norms under which business operates. These strategies are examined through qualitative case study analysis of two environmental shareholder campaigns: one organized by Ceres (Coalition for Environmentally Responsible Economies) addressing climate change and the other organized by Investor Environmental Health Network (IEHN) addressing hydraulic fracturing. These case studies show that resolution filing with broad investor appeal and linked to a policy agenda can achieve change beyond targeted companies. Case study insights may contribute to the formation of a Canadian shareholder coalition organized around improved corporate disclosure of Oil Sands risks and improved government monitoring of environmental impacts. Investor groups, mostly Canadian, have framed the environmental and social issues in terms that resonate with the investment community and policy makers. Investor activists in Canada, the US and Europe have filed a number of shareholder resolutions at Oil Sands companies. This marks progress towards investor coalition formation with coordinated shareholder action and a multi-jurisdictional reach.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it