Values of Directors, Gender Diversity and Corporate Social Responsibility in the Industrial Region of Ghana
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In recent years, gender diversity has gained considerable attention at both the global and national levels and is aimed at multiple perspectives including governance and operations. However, the available evidence on the outcomes of gender diversity have been largely demonstrated for the developed world. The evidence for developing countries is rare to find or at best nascent. This calls for concern as the evidence from the global north may be at variance with the case of the global south due to differences in cultures, demographics, institutional quality, regulation and economic development. This study focuses on a developing country context to achieve the following two sequential objectives: examination of the gender gaps in values of female and male directors, and an investigation of the effect of gender diversity on corporate social responsibility. Using data collected on 312 medium and large firms in the Greater Accra Region of Ghana and, values data on 792 respective directors of the firms comprising 292 female and 500 male directors, the Ordinary Least Square and Propensity Score Matching techniques are employed. Gender gaps in values were largely observed across male and female directors, with female directors ranking lower in power, but high in hedonism compared to the male directors. Gender diversity was observed to have corporate social responsibility increasing effects at the firm level. Relatively, gender diverse firms have the biggest effect in increasing ethical responsibility, followed by discretionary, economic and legal responsibilities respectively. Finally, we find a positive nonlinear relationship between gender diversity and corporate social responsibility akin to the critical mass theory. Overall, the findings on director values and gender diversity-corporate social responsibility linkage converge with that of the developed countries. Hence, we recommend intensifying gender quota and affirmation actions among corporate bodies in developing countries to promote socially responsible outcomes.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".