MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016990628 · doi:10.1108/mbr-02-2020-0044

Natural disasters and MNC sub-national investments in China

2020· article· en· W3016990628 on OpenAlexaff
Chang Hoon Oh, Jennifer Oetzel, Jorge Rivera, Donald Lien

Bibliographic record

VenueMultinational Business Review · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInternational Business and FDI
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMultinational corporationSubsidiaryNatural disasterBusinessChinaContext (archaeology)Investment (military)Sample (material)Foreign direct investmentFinanceEconomicsGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose The purpose of this study is to examine how foreign firms consider natural disaster risk in subsequent investment decisions in a host country and whether different location portfolios can serve to mitigate investment risk. Design/methodology/approach The author sample includes data on 437 Fortune Global 500 firms and their initial entry into Chinese provinces between 1955 and 2008. Findings Using a fixed effects logit model of discrete time event history analysis, results show that geographic proximity to same multinational corporation (MNC) subsidiaries and different MNC subsidiaries from the same home country mitigates the negative effect of natural disasters on MNC entry into an affected province, while geographic proximity to other MNC subsidiaries from different home countries does not. Originality/value The knowledge needed to respond to severe disasters appears to be highly context-specific and shared only between firms with a high degree of commonality and trust.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.265

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations65
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMultinational Business ReviewSame topicInternational Business and FDIFrench-language works237,207