Rôle et responsabilités des hauts dirigeants face aux changements climatiques : réflexions à partir du cas de BP
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors que l’on assiste à une exploitation colossale des combustibles fossiles conventionnels, que penser des discours engagés des plus grosses entreprises pétrolières et gazières contre le réchauffement climatique ? C’est cette ambiguïté que cherche à expliquer cet article en s’intéressant à la manière dont les hauts dirigeants envisagent leurs responsabilités de manière générale, mais aussi plus particulièrement face aux changements climatiques. Pour ce faire, l’article met en parallèle l’image publique de la compagnie British Petroleum (BP) suite à sa campagne Beyond Petroleum , les discours de son dirigeant à la veille de la tragédie survenue sur la plateforme Deepwater Horizon en 2010, et les éléments marquants de la gestion de cet événement dramatique. Il ressort de cette analyse que l’élan social et environnemental du haut dirigeant se heurte à la configuration actuelle de l’entreprise selon laquelle ce dernier ne doit réellement être responsable qu’envers l’actionnaire. C’est donc chez ce dernier que des solutions pourraient se profiler.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".