MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2140883532 · doi:10.1504/ijse.2010.033398

Collaborating for sustainability: strategic knowledge networks, natural resource management and regional development

2010· article· en· W2140883532 on OpenAlexaffabout
Nancy Higginson, Harrie Vredenburg

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Sustainable Economy · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Knowledge Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityBusinessStakeholderStakeholder engagementNatural resourceResource (disambiguation)Knowledge managementEnvironmental resource managementEconomicsComputer scienceManagementPublic relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Many firms have turned to strategies based on collaborative initiatives with stakeholders to generate the valuable knowledge resources needed to be successful in today's global economy. Firms in natural resource-based industries such as mining, energy and forestry, which typically provide the backbone for regional development in their production locations, have become leaders in establishing innovative sustainability initiatives that integrate a range of stakeholder interests. Using a case-based inductive theory-building approach, this paper presents a model of a strategic knowledge network based on collaboration between firms in Canada's west coast forest products industry and their stakeholders. It presents a three-phase model with the important knowledge creating variables, the knowledge resources accruing from the network, and the performance implications for the firms. The model has value for firms in other resource-based industries that face stakeholder conflicts and are working to incorporate sustainability principles into their strategies.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.931
Threshold uncertainty score0.753

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueInternational Journal of Sustainable EconomySame topicInnovation and Knowledge ManagementFrench-language works237,207