The paradox of corporate sustainability: analyzing the moral landscape of Canadian grocers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Food prices have experienced unprecedented increases in recent times. Simultaneously, grocers are facing allegations of capitalizing on inflation to generate unjustifiable profits. Escalating expenses and a lack of transparency have engendered heightened consumer skepticism. This perceived presence of barriers and excessive profitability gives rise to ethical concerns. Our case study delves into the ethical landscape surrounding Canadian grocers, aiming to probe the public's demand for accountability. To comprehend the factors responsible for the transformation in consumer perception of Canadian grocers in 2022, we conducted an analysis utilizing data from consumers, corporate watchdogs, and industry sources. We extended the paradox perspective on corporate sustainability framework to include a historical aspect to use as our analytical lens. This study sheds light on the alterations in circumstances that have led Canadian consumers to question entire industries and accounting practices that were previously considered unproblematic. As a remedy, we recommend the establishment of a mandatory code of conduct for grocers and an enhancement in the transparency of financial reporting. Paradoxically, corporate profits may continue to grow when societal needs are no longer perceived as being neglected or, even worse, exploited.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".