The Sustainable Development Goals: A Tipping Point for Impact Measurement?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article proposes a holistic framework of integrated social accounting that could be adopted by all types of organizations in the social economy, as well as in other sectors. The impetus for this derives from the popularity of the sustainable development goals (SDGs) and the broadening of collective impact thinking. The article advances a model of integrated social accounting that brings together four dimensions: 1) resources/capitals, 2) value creation/destruction, 3) internal systems and processes, and 4) organizational learning, growth, and innovation. Organizations using this model focus on the implications of their activities through the lens of the SDGs, looking both internally and externally.Cet article propose un cadre global de comptabilité sociale intégrée qui pourrait être adopté par les organisations de l’économie sociale, ainsi que dans d’autres secteurs. Cela découle de la popularité des objectifs de développement durable (ODD) et de l’élargissement de la réflexion collective en matière d’impact. L’article avance un modèle de comptabilité sociale intégrée qui regroupe quatre dimensions : 1) ressources / capitaux, 2) création / destruction de valeur, 3) systèmes et processus internes et 4) apprentissage organisationnel, croissance et innovation. Les organisations qui utilisent ce modèle se concentrent sur les implications de leurs activités dans l’optique des ODD, en cherchant à la fois en interne et en externe.
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 | 0.014 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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".