MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3198092386 · doi:10.1177/10860266211042659

Reconciling Institutional Logics Within First Nations Forestry-Based Social Enterprises

2021· article· en· W3198092386 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueOrganization & Environment · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicMining and Resource Management
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousPolitical scienceSociologyThrough-the-lens meteringEconomic systemEconomicsLens (geology)Ecology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The institutional frameworks that Indigenous groups put in place to govern economic processes within their communities are critical to the advancement of their diverse cultural-ecological, social, and economic development goals. Through the lens of institutional logics, this article examines the ways in which First Nations community sawmill enterprises in British Columbia, Canada, navigate the sectoral demands brought by a productivist paradigm of forestry. We find that First Nations community sawmill enterprises represent spaces of both logical tension and innovation where conflicts that arise between dominant “commercial” logics and culturally legitimate “Indigenous” logics can be reconciled. Through this analysis, this article offers an empirical example of the emergence of Indigenous institutional frameworks, as well as a contribution to the growing body of literature that addresses the ways in which hybrid organizations can and do navigate and overcome conflicting institutional logics.

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 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)0.000
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: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.739
Threshold uncertainty score0.948

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.161 · 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