MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097698296 · doi:10.1504/gber.2010.034892

Dynamic capabilities for strategic green advantage: green electricity purchasing in North American firms, SMEs, NGOs and agencies

2010· article· en· W2097698296 on OpenAlexafffund
Travis Gliedt, Paul Parker

Bibliographic record

VenueGlobal Business and Economics Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicPublic Procurement and Policy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaUniversity of Waterloo
KeywordsBusinessDynamic capabilitiesPurchasingIndustrial organizationElectricityMarketingCommerceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

North American businesses, social economy organisations and government agencies are tackling the challenges of declining non-renewable energy resources and climate change by voluntarily purchasing green electricity (GE). This study uses a survey of 213 organisations that voluntarily purchase GE to test the influence of green institutional and green resource-based factors on the purchase decision. Components of green institutional theory and the green resource-based view of the firm were found to have only a secondary or indirect influence on the voluntary decision to purchase GE. In contrast, the overwhelming importance attributed by respondents to the role of champions suggests that internal agency should be incorporated into future studies examining voluntary environmental decisions from an organisational perspective. The dynamic capabilities process, defined as the interaction between champions and environmental structures, can generate strategic green advantage if champions use environmental structures to emphasise: 1) environmental benefits; 2) marketing and green image benefits; 3) the GE purchase as a hedge against fossil-fuel price uncertainty.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.017

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.233 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations12
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGlobal Business and Economics ReviewSame topicPublic Procurement and PolicyFrench-language works237,207