Legitimacy Contexts of BoP Markets: Characterization and Implications for Supply Chain Functions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An important market that is receiving increasing attention by firms relates to the poorest at the Base of the Pyramid (BoP). BoP businesses contribute to the first UN Sustainable Development Goal that calls for an end to poverty in all its manifestations. BoP businesses are regarded as financially and socially beneficial for both participating firms and poor communities. It is, however, understood that success in BoP markets cannot (and should not) be assumed, as it demands a profoundly different view towards managing supply chains. Focusing on this issue, our conceptual study contributes to the emerging debates in BoP and supply chain management research by elaborating the notion of legitimacy contexts (LCs) at BoP. We draw on institutional theory to characterize the LCs in BoP markets and discuss their implications for key supply chain functions. We argue that firms often design their supply chain functions for BoP business using their own LCs as opposed to those of BoP actors. This implies ignoring the institutional distance between BoP markets and firms and reveals a key culprit in the failure of BoP projects. We offer practical implications for firms intending to engage in BoP business.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".