Eco-control change and environmental performance: a longitudinal perspective
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Purpose The aim of this longitudinal study is to quantitatively examine the impact of changes in the mix of eco-controls. More specifically, the purpose of this study is twofold. First, it investigates the nature of change occurring in eco-controls by analyzing three attributes of change, namely, direction of change, scope of change and scale of change. Second, this study investigates the impact of changes in eco-controls by examining to what extent the three attributes of change specifically explain environmental performance. Design/methodology/approach Longitudinal survey approach is used to collect data from a sample of manufacturing firms at two points in time. Findings The results suggest three main conclusions: changes leading to more (less) importance devoted to eco-controls within the organization contribute positively (negatively) to environmental performance; concerted changes on all aspects of the mix of eco-controls contribute more to environmental performance than piecemeal changes on specific aspects of the mix; and the aspect which contributes to environmental performance is not the scale of that change but the mere presence of a credible signal which reflects the seriousness of the intentions. Originality/value This paper contributes to management accounting change literature by breaking down the nature of change of management control practices in attributes (direction, scope and scale) and examining their specific impact on performance.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".