MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3031477414 · doi:10.1080/14719037.2020.1865435

To measure or not to measure?An empirical investigation of social impact measurement in UK social enterprises

2021· article· en· W3031477414 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

VenuePublic Management Review · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersLeverhulme Trust
KeywordsBusinessValue (mathematics)Sample (material)Context (archaeology)Social enterpriseDual (grammatical number)Public sectorMeasure (data warehouse)Social impactPublic economicsSocial economyPublic relationsEconomicsSociologyPolitical scienceEconomy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Social enterprises (SE) – organizations with a dual mission to generate economic and social value – have become important players in the delivery of public services in the UK and elsewhere. While public sector value-for-money imperatives encourages these hybrid organizations to provide estimates of their social and economic impact, relatively little is known about who does so. Using institutional perspectives and large-sample data produced by Social Enterprises UK, we empirically document the uptake of social impact measurement in this sector and the extent to which context, the nature of the impact and stakeholders involvement explain differences in participation rates.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.526
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.258
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.105 · 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