Construction et légitimation initiales des standards transnationaux de responsabilité des entreprises : entre actions intentionnelles et contraintes institutionnelles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les acteurs engagés dans le processus de construction d’une norme transnationale dans le domaine de la responsabilité des entreprises (rse) effectuent différentes formes de travail institutionnel afin de mener leur projet à terme. En mettant l’accent sur les processus et sur les acteurs, cette recherche compare la mise en oeuvre de deux standards : le Pacte mondial (Global Compact) de l’onuet la normeiso26000 de l’Organisation internationale de normalisation. L’analyse approfondit notre compréhension des liens entre les types de travail institutionnel et les différentes dimensions de la légitimité. Elle révèle les mécanismes de légitimation dans la construction initiale d’une normerse. Si le travail institutionnel est toujours d’une importance cruciale, il prend différentes formes selon les conditions propres à chaque initiative.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.050 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".