Investigating the Effectiveness of the Maritime Regulatory Regime to Address a Socially Responsible Shipping Industry: A Content Analysis Study
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 introduction of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), in 2015, has transformed the approach of public and private entities to address environmental, social and economic challenges. As result, new governance and management insights are sought, among them corporate social responsibility (CSR), which is increasingly seen as a self-regulating means to help organizations meet multifaceted challenges. With regard to shipping, global developments have called for a blueprint to facilitate industry's transition to a more sustainable pathway. However, CSR applicability in the maritime business is relatively recent and has been mainly viewed as a voluntary and beyond regulatory compliance notion. Among these shifts, this study explores the effectiveness and extent to which the maritime regulatory regime has addressed CSR topics. A case study strategy and content analysis method is employed. In turn, ISO 26000 social responsibility standard employed as the guiding paradigm to identify applicability of CSR norms within selected maritime legislation. Findings revealed a satisfactory coverage by the maritime regime of CSR issues falling under the scope of human rights, labor, the environment and organizational governance subjects. Though, it seemed to lag behind in subjects situated within the array of fair operating practices, consumer treatment and community involvement.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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