MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

US Market Integration and Corporate Governance Practices: evidence from Canadian companies

2007· article· en· W2111277311 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCorporate Governance An International Review · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Finance and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessCredenceGlobalizationAccountingShareholderIndex (typography)Product marketFinancial marketSample (material)Market economyEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The objective of this study is to investigate further the interplay between market globalisation and corporate governance practices. The study is conducted in Canada using a sample of 230 firms listed on the TSX in 2002 and ranked by Report on Business (ROB ) on a set of corporate governance best practices. The ROB corporate governance index is built around four categories, namely board composition, compensation, shareholder rights and disclosure. The interaction of the sample companies with the US markets is analysed on the three following dimensions: financial market, product market and multi‐markets (combining financial, product and labour markets). Overall, our results show that greater US market interaction is associated with higher corporate governance ratings. This study adds evidence on the positive relation between market integration and corporate governance practices and, as such, provides some credence to the claim that globalisation will lead to a certain degree of market‐driven convergence in corporate governance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.159
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.008
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.082
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.206 · 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