MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803907955 · doi:10.5539/jms.v8n2p1

Influences on the Diffusion of Environmental Programmes in Small Businesses in the Greening of an Industry for Sustainability: The Case of Golf

2018· article· en· W2803907955 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dino M. Minoli

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management and Sustainability · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Environmental Valuation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityGreeningBusinessGovernment (linguistics)Empirical researchEnvironmental resource managementEnvironmental economicsMarketingEconomicsPolitical scienceEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Globally there are around 34,000 golf facilities including very many small golf clubs that collectively generate significant economic, social and environmental impacts. Thus, small golf clubs have an important role to play in the greening of golf in support of sustainability. Environmental programmes (EPs) were developed to improve the environmental performance of all types and sizes of golf facilities. However, EPs are rarely employed in small golf clubs and no research until now has explored the reasons for this. Data from an in-depth mixed methods case study found several internal and external influences on the level of implementation of EPs in small golf clubs. Interventions are suggested to stimulate the uptake of EPs in smaller golf clubs. The study is of value to the golf sector, government policy and organisations concerned with the greening of small businesses in the greening of an industry sector for sustainability. The study also provides a conceptual/empirical framework for further studies in this under-researched yet noteworthy field.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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 score0.048
Threshold uncertainty score0.096

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.200 · 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

Citations3
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management and SustainabilitySame topicEconomic and Environmental ValuationFrench-language works237,207