MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3131946853 · doi:10.1177/0193723521991413

Sport for Sustainability? The Extractives Industry, Sport, and Sustainable Development

2021· article· en· W3131946853 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Rob Millington, Audrey R. Giles, Nicolien van Luijk, Lyndsay Hayhurst

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Sport and Social Issues · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsYork UniversityUniversity of OttawaBrock University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsCorporate social responsibilitySustainabilitySustainable developmentIndigenousCorporatizationBusinessPolitical scienceEnvironmental planningGeographyPublic relationsEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates the intersection of three interrelated trends: first, the positioning of sport as a contributor to sustainable development, particularly in regard to the increasing corporatization of sport for development (SFD); second, the trend toward sustainable development in the extractives industry, as taken up within a corporate social responsibility (CSR) approach; and third, the intersection of SFD and CSR when mobilized in pursuit of sustainable development in Indigenous communities in Canada. To do so, we examined the sustainability documents of Rio Tinto, the largest mining and metals company in Canada, with a focus on its operations in the Canadian North that are near Indigenous communities. Based on our results, we argue that SFD programming and the CSR approaches of Rio Tinto promote forms of sustainable development that capitalize on broadened (and emptied) definitions of sustainability, which may ultimately contribute to greater forms of unsustainability.

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)0.002
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 score0.670
Threshold uncertainty score0.970

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.322 · 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.

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

Citations64
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Sport and Social IssuesSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207