MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3026953935 · doi:10.1177/0169796x20924365

States and Firms Co-producing Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) in the Developing World

2020· article· en· W3026953935 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Developing Societies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate social responsibilityTypologyGeneral partnershipBusinessSalience (neuroscience)EnforcementProduction (economics)PoliticsPublic economicsEconomicsAccountingPublic relationsSociologyPolitical scienceFinanceMicroeconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines policy options that are co-produced by both states and firms, with the purpose of regulating an area of public policy and the practice of corporate social responsibility (CSR) by companies. The contributions of this article are twofold. First, it creates a typology of the co-production of corporate social responsibility, adding “delegated,” “brokered,” and “partnership” as intermediate categories between the natural end points of “voluntary” and “regulated.” Second, it proposes a framework for understanding why governments opt for a particular version of co-produced regulation, by focusing on the interaction between two key variables, the “net enforcement cost” and the “political salience of the demand for regulation.” The framework is tested on examples of the co-production of CSR from Argentina and Peru, where I identify pathways of change from one category of co-production to another.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.636
Threshold uncertainty score0.411

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.209 · 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