Green accounting, material flow cost accounting and environmental performance
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to determine the effects of green accounting and Material Flow Cost Accounting (MFCA) on environmental performance as indicated by PROPER rating. This study is conducted on cement manufacturing companies in Indonesia by using a descriptive quantitative research model tested on three variables: green accounting, MFCA, and environmental performance. The green accounting aspect is taken from the extent of Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) disclosure and MFCA is focused on the effectiveness of costs. The MFCA dimensions are production costs, size of production area, and production value. Environmental performance aspect is measured by the PROPER rating issued by the Ministry of Environment and Forestry. The study is conducted in several stages. First, a literature review of previous research related to green accounting, MFCA, and environmental performance is performed. Next, the research problems are formulated. After that, the data from the companies are collected and analyzed by using SmartPLS. Finally, it is concluded that green accounting affects environmental performance, whereas MFCA has no effect on environmental performance.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 it