MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4294225578 · doi:10.1111/joms.12863

Can Corporate Social Responsibility Lead to Social License? A Sentiment and Emotion Analysis

2022· article· en· W4294225578 on OpenAlexafffund
Shuna Shu Ham Ho, Chang Hoon Oh, Daniel Shapiro

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Management Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCorporate Social Responsibility Reporting
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser UniversityDalhousie University
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLicenseCorporate social responsibilityMultinational corporationLocal communityLegitimacyBusinessPolarization (electrochemistry)CorporationLaw and economicsPublic relationsPolitical scienceLawEconomicsFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The term social license (SL) refers to the acceptance or approval by a community of a company's presence. It is generally assumed in the literature that effective corporate social responsibility (CSR) actions will lead to an SL. In this study we examine the CSR‐SL relationship at the local community level and establish boundary conditions on the effectiveness of local CSR in creating an SL. Using consent‐based micro‐social contract theory, we theorize that commitment to local CSR improves the level to which a local community grants an SL to a multinational corporation (MNC), but the impact is moderated by the global legitimacy of the parent company, the nature of institutions in the host country, and the degree of polarization within the focal community. Based on 3696 articles regarding 43 global mining MNCs operating in 523 local communities between 2008 and 2020, we use natural language processing and sentiment analysis to evaluate the degree to which a local community grants an SL. Our empirical evidence indicates that local CSR does positively influence the granting of an SL, but the effect is reduced when there is strong rule of law or high community polarization and increased when the focal firm has strong global legitimacy.

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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.337
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations43
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Management StudiesSame topicCorporate Social Responsibility ReportingFrench-language works237,207