MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166963134 · doi:10.1002/bse.1727

Critical Areas and Entry Points for Sustainability‐Related Strategies in the Sugarcane‐Based Ethanol Industry of Brazil

2012· article· en· W2166963134 on OpenAlexafffund
Wellington Spetic, Patricia Márquez, Robert Kozak

Bibliographic record

VenueBusiness Strategy and the Environment · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersInternational Development Research Centre
KeywordsSustainabilityMainstreamConstruct (python library)BusinessMarketingPrivate sectorSustainability organizationsQualitative researchStrategic managementProcess (computing)Grounded theoryIndustrial organizationEnvironmental economicsEnvironmental resource managementEconomicsSociologyEconomic growthEcologyComputer sciencePolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT This study reveals five critical areas that Brazil's sugarcane‐based ethanol industry could capitalize on to incorporate sustainability into their firms' strategies. The emergent theoretical framework represents a starting point for further investigations aimed at integrating the sustainability construct and strategies for the industry. A growing body of literature calls for strategic management to adapt to complex and ever‐changing environments and sustainability trends. For many firms in developing economies, sustainability remains isolated from mainstream strategy, resulting in reactive approaches on the part of management. A qualitative research method – grounded theory – was used to induct from data. Five themes emerged from the analysis providing guidance on where sustainability‐related strategies ought to begin. This research posits that existing sectoral innovation systems could be used to channel sustainability‐driven innovations. In addition, a combination of public and private efforts to foster innovations based on the emergent themes could increase the value of industry under study, while lessening its social and environmental footprint. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.098

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.247
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

Citations24
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBusiness Strategy and the EnvironmentSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207