MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3110897995 · doi:10.29173/cjnser.2020v11n2a353

Performance management, impact measurement and the sustainable development goals: The fourth wave of integrated social accounting?/Gestion de la performance, mesure de l'impact et les objectifs de développement durable: la quatrième vague de comptabilité sociale intégrée?

2020· article· en· W3110897995 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurie Mook

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy research · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Sciences and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSustainable developmentPolitical scienceWelfare economicsHumanitiesSociologyBusinessEconomicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Integrated social accounting places social and environmental performance alongside financial performance. This is in contrast to supplemental social accounting reports, which are separate from the financial reporting and often used as marketing and public relations devices. It is possible to identify different ‘waves’ of integrated social accounting, starting with the first wave in the 1970s, the second wave in the 1990s, and the third wave in the 2000s. Today, with the popularization of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 2030 agenda, we may be entering the fourth wave. The Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) provide a common language and shared purpose for a multitude of actors, spanning networks, organizational types, and geographical levels. This article proposes an integrated social accounting model that focuses organizational attention on the internal and external impacts of their activities, through the lens of the SDGs. La comptabilité sociale intégrée place la performance sociale et environnementale aux côtés de la performance financière. Cela contraste avec les rapports supplémentaires de comptabilité sociale, qui sont séparés des rapports financiers et souvent utilisés comme dispositifs de marketing et de relations publiques. Il est possible d’identifier différentes «vagues» de comptabilité sociale intégrée, à commencer par la première vague des années 1970, la deuxième vague des années 1990 et la troisième vague des années 2000. Aujourd'hui, avec la popularisation du programme des Nations Unies pour le développement durable à l'horizon 2030, nous entrons peut-être dans la quatrième vague. Les objectifs de développement durable (ODD) fournissent un langage commun et un objectif commun à une multitude d'acteurs, couvrant des réseaux, des types d'organisations et des niveaux géographiques. Cet article propose un modèle de comptabilité sociale intégré qui concentre l'attention sur les impacts internes et externes des activités organisationnelles à travers la lentille des ODD.

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 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)0.027
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.164
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0270.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.063
GPT teacher head0.352
Teacher spread0.289 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations9
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy researchSame topicSocial Sciences and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207