Towards a community centred approach to corporate community involvement in the sporting events agenda
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
Abstract The purpose of this paper was to examine ways that corporations can make a greater contribution to civic and community development through strategic ties to a city's development agenda surrounding the hosting of sporting events. Using the perspective of Corporate Community Involvement (CCI), we draw upon data collected as part of a larger study on sporting events and community development to explore how cities and corporations can make socially responsible contributions to communities. The guiding principles of community involvement in decision-making, full public disclosure and transparency, and grassroots legacy planning underscore the importance of community-based strategies for CCI. We offer three related strategies: comprehensive social and community impact assessments, facilitation of local knowledge capital and providers, and cross-sectoral management event programming as ways for corporations to begin to engage in CCI activities related to events. These strategies offer opportunities for organisation to use sport to make a valuable contribution to communities and community development activities.
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 | 0.006 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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