Ideological Challenges to Changing Strategic Orientation in Commodity Agriculture
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
Why do some firms not change their strategic orientation despite economic incentives to do so? Most current literature on changing strategic orientations has focused on an antecedents and outcomes approach to business orientations. Intimated, but rarely addressed, are the notions that (1) strategic orientations may be thought of as ideologies and (2) such ideologies are likely to contend with each other. Taking such a perspective may be helpful in discussing why it is challenging to transition to more sustainable strategic orientations even in the presence of financial incentives to do so. In assessing the transition to organic production and marketing in a commodity agriculture context, the authors find that contending ideologies restrict its adoption. In addition, they suggest that strategic orientations are not adopted or contested solely within firms but also among them. The authors find that ideological contestation among firms in this context takes the form of a marketplace drama between a chemical, productionist orientation and an organic orientation in which protagonists mobilize several forms of legitimacy.
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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.001 |
| 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 it