MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148609104 · doi:10.5465/ambpp.2003.13792394

MULTILEVEL DETERMINANTS AND PROCESSES OF INSTITUTIONAL CHANGE IN THE BRITISH COLUMBIA COASTAL FOREST INDUSTRY.

2003· article· en· W2148609104 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Charlene Zietsma

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicForest Management and Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClearcuttingLoggingBusinessNegotiationLegislationForestryPolitical scienceGeographyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses the multilevel determinants and processes of institutional change in the British Columbia coastal forest industry. Institutional change is attracting increasing attention among organizational scholars. Individual organizations change first, often stimulated by changes in the broader environment. Innovations are later mimetically adopted by other organizations under certain conditions. Within an organization, the need for change is noticed and championed by an individual or team, and the adoption of change requires adjustments in the interpretations of other organization members. For years in British Columbia, environmentalists and forest companies engaged in a War of the Woods. Environmentalists protested clearcutting (a logging practice in which all of the trees in an area are cut), by blockading roads and chaining themselves to logging equipment. Clearcutting was institutionalized by practice, by legislation, and normatively. Forest companies staunchly defended clearcutting as tree farming, the safest way to log, and the only way they could stay in business. In 1998, forest company MacMillan Bloedel (MB) shocked its industry and stakeholders, and earned environmentalists' accolades, when it announced it would completely replace clearcutting with variable retention logging. MB subsequently pressured other firms to adopt variable retention and negotiate with environmentalists. Several of the largest companies did, and the institutional environment changed radically.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.013
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.227
Threshold uncertainty score0.456

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.013
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.262
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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicForest Management and PolicyFrench-language works237,207