Stakeholder involvement in corporate social and environmental strategies in Mont-Tremblant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Corporations at mountain resort destinations have far reaching impacts on the communities in which they operate.This research examines the extent to which a resort development company (Intrawest, Mont-Tremblant) involves stakeholders in planning and decision-making and how this influences the company's social and environmental strategies and the community's evolution.The results suggest that lntrawest utilized inclusive stakeholder strategies when it first arrived in Mont-Tremblant.These relationships fostered trust and openness, influenced the community's evolution and the company's strategies.Recently, lntrawest appears to have become more selective in its stakeholder strategies and now focuses on those groups able to provide it with the licenses and permits required to conduct business.Overall trust and general stakeholder awareness about environmental or social programs, development plans and Intrawest's long-term vision have decreased.DEDICATION I would like to dedicate this thesis to my mother for her endless love and support throughout my life and university career.Throughout the trials and tribulations of this master's degree she never failed to believe that I could achieve.To my fatherfor his support and words of wisdom which helped me see problems in new light and push to achieve my dreams.Most of all, I would like to dedicate my thesis to my boyfriend Rickfor his love and understanding throughout the last two years.He has been an inspiration and a pillar of support throughout the six years that I have known him and especially through this degree.Even though I would move 5,000 kilometres away to complete my masters, he supported and encouraged my decision.He made me believe that I had the inner strength to achieve my goals and never doubted my abilities even when I did.His undying love and encouragement made being so far from him and home feel not so very far away.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".