ROLE OF MARKET BASED INSTRUMENTS IN THE NEW BUSINESS PARADIGM
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper attempts to develop a prescriptive theory/model for the strategic application of market based policy instruments. The research paper documents the development of command and control regulatory instruments and provides a normative account of their use by businesses for competitive positioning. The paper then reports the development of Market Based Policy Instruments (MBI) and explains their prospective defensive and offensive strategic applications based on Porter's Five Forces model of industry analysis. Finally, a prescriptive model that describes the strategic application of MBI is provided based on the preceding analysis. It is assumed that successful firms will not shy away or avoid future regulatory instruments but use them to their competitive advantage. That competitive advantage will come from core firm values that emphasize dramatic increases in resource productivity, the elimination of waste, the use of solution-based business models, and reinvestment in the natural capital. The strategies and tactics that will guide the evolution of "laggard" firms into "achiever" and "enviropreneurial" firms is not precisely mapped out, but there are a number of tools, tactics and strategies that firms can use. All of them are applicable depending on the managerial maturity of the firm and its capacity to extend its environmental management practices, strategy and vision throughout its organisation and to its constellation of relationships. Firms looking for unique competitive advantages should consider using market based regulatory instruments to differentiate their products and services to overcome seemingly impossible market entry barriers, reduce operating costs, and turn waste into profit.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".