MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3208122725 · doi:10.29173/pathways21

Corporate Social Responsibility: An Anthropological Approach to Understanding CSR as Global Governance

2021· article· en· W3208122725 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.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenuePathways · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicGlobal trade, sustainability, and social impact
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Saskatchewan
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate social responsibilityCorporate governancePower (physics)PoliticsUnintended consequencesGlobal governanceElement (criminal law)Work (physics)Public relationsBusinessSocial responsibilityPolitical sciencePolitical economySociologyLawFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Corporate social responsibility (CSR) has become a crucial element of development projects, and this has led anthropologists to speculate on the unintended consequences of positioning big busi­ness as givers of aid. Supported by international law and governments that deregulate businesses who practice CSR, corporations move freely across borders into countries whose communities become dependent on corporate aid dollars. Corporations assert their financial might by funneling their aid dollars through partnerships with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) in the coun­tries where they operate. An examination of the structure of partnerships formed between and among corporations, governments, and NGOs shows that they are imbalanced in their power struc­ture and this imbalance extends to the target populations of CSR programs. This paper examines the ramifications of these power imbalances through an assessment of Coca-Cola's activity in India and Israel alongside a review of the work of anthropologists in the area of CSR. Through this examination, I argue that CSR programs are instilling corporations with political influence that enables them to vie for global governing power, demonstrating that this dynamic has dire conse­quences for both the communities with whom corporations are interacting and the environment.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.176
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.148
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.164 · 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