MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3035739100 · doi:10.1080/0965254x.2020.1777185

Influence of social network participation, regional density, and customer interaction on the adoption of sustainability initiatives

2020· article· en· W3035739100 on OpenAlexaff
Ying Zhu, Ebrahim Mazaheri

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Strategic Marketing · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicWine Industry and Tourism
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier UniversityOkanagan University CollegeUniversity of British Columbia, Okanagan CampusUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainabilityBusinessExtant taxonMarketingSustainability organizationsSocial sustainabilityWinerySustainable businessEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study extends the extant literature on sustainability adoption by investigating the influence of business network participation, regional density, and the channels for customer interaction on companies’ adoption of sustainability initiatives. Data were collected from 311 wineries in Oregon. The results suggest that participating in a business network is a significant and positive determinant of wineries’ adoption of sustainability programs. Regional density also has a significant impact on sustainability adoption, such that wineries operating in less dense regions are more likely to adopt sustainability initiatives. Interestingly, the winery density of a region also moderates the impact of business networks on sustainability adoption. Specifically, the effect of business networks on sustainability decisions is stronger for wineries in dense regions. The research results also suggest that wineries with more channels for direct customer interactions are more likely to adopt sustainability initiatives.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.024

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.232 · 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

Citations8
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Strategic MarketingSame topicWine Industry and TourismFrench-language works237,207