Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Citation (2012), "Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability", Tench, R., Sun, W. and Jones, B. (Ed.) Corporate Social Irresponsibility: A Challenging Concept (Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability, Vol. 4), Emerald Group Publishing Limited, Bingley, p. ii. https://doi.org/10.1108/S2043-9059(2012)0000004023 Publisher: Emerald Group Publishing Limited Copyright © 2012, Emerald Group Publishing Limited Book Chapters Corporate Social Irresponsibility: A Challenging Concept Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability Critical Studies on Corporate Responsibility, Governance and Sustainability Copyright Page List of Tables List of Figures List of Contributors Editorial Advisory and Review Board About the Editors About the Authors Acknowledgements The Challenging Concept of Corporate Social Irresponsibility: An Introduction What CSR is not: Corporate Social Irresponsibility A Rather Delicious Paradox: Social Responsibility and the Manufacture of Armaments The Structural Contradictions and Constraints on Corporate Social Responsibility: Challenges for Corporate Social Irresponsibility The Janus Dialectic of Corporate Social Irresponsibility and Corporate Social Responsibility – The Role of Micro-Moments Economic Rationality and Corporate Social Irresponsibility: An Illustrative Review of Social Capital Theory Rating Agencies as a Corporate Governance Mechanism: Power and Trust Production in Debt Capital Markets Organisations Behaving Badly – The Role of Communication in Understanding CSI and CSR Reconstructing Stakeholder Relationships Using ‘Corporate Social Responsibility’ as a Response Strategy to Cases of Corporate Irresponsibility: The Case of the 2010 BP Spill in the Gulf of Mexico The Structural Dynamics of Corporate Social Irresponsibility: The Case of the Canadian Mining Industry The Community Obligations of Canadian Oil Companies: A Case Study of Talisman in the Sudan Impact of Corporate Social Irresponsibility on the Corporate Image and Reputation of Multinational Oil Corporations in Nigeria The Irresponsible Enterprise: The Ethics of Corporate Downsizing
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.027 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".