Sustainability Content on Oil and Gas Company Websites
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
This study examines the sustainability content and the determinants underlying such content on Canadian oil and gas company websites. The website content of 68 of the largest oil firms listed on the S&P/TSX was evaluated using an index based on each of the three Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) components (environmental, social and economic). The characteristics of the firms were then regressed on the content analysis. The results suggest that the larger the firm and the greater its media exposure, the more likely it is to include sustainability disclosures on its website. Firm profitability and leverage seem to be unrelated to these types of disclosures. This study provides empirical observations that could be useful for stakeholders wishing to obtain information about firms’ sustainability practices and for various organizations involved in developing sustainability disclosure guidelines. The results tend to show that, despite the growing popularity of sustainability reporting benchmarks like the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), the voluntary nature of sustainability disclosures has elicited a variety of disclosure practices on organizations’ websites.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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