Multinational financial corporations and the sustainable development goals in developing countries
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
Multinational financial corporations are key to sustainability by implementing practices disclosed through sustainability reports. This is where research has been focused, leaving a gap concerning their sustainability foci on developing countries. This article studies the largest financial corporations from developed and emerging countries identifying the SDGs on which they focus in developing countries, the evolution of their contributions and differences in the SDGs, and where their focus is in the developing world. The largest multinational financial corporations were selected, their sustainability reports assessed, and mixed methods conducted finding that the foci of those from developed countries vary across SDGs, countries of origin, impacted developing countries, and since the launch of the SDGs. Findings highlight the SDGs on which financial corporations focus, with those from developed countries implementing more practices than those from emerging economies, and that the contributions of multinational financial corporations have not affected the progress of the SDGs.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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