MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405934646 · doi:10.33002/jelp040306

Corporate Governance as an Area of Innovation: Challenges and Prospects in Environmental Policy

2024· article· en· W4405934646 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mykhailo Shkilniak, Григорій Монастирський, Наталія КРИВОКУЛЬСЬКА, Nataliya Kotys, І. В. Чикало

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Environmental Law & Policy · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicEconomic and Business Development Strategies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCorporate governanceBusinessEnvironmental policyEnvironmental planningGeographyFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The research relevance is determined by the need to study the role of corporate governance in promoting the innovative development of enterprises to promote environmental protection. The study aims to analyse the relationship between corporate governance and innovation processes, identify factors influencing the success of innovation initiatives within companies, and propose strategies for enhancing innovation management. Utilising synthesis, system analysis, and modelling methods, the study highlights that effective corporate governance for sustainability requires integrating environmental goals into strategic planning, fostering stakeholder collaboration, and implementing advanced risk assessment tools. The findings indicate that companies recognising the strategic significance of innovation and embedding it within their business strategies achieve substantial advantages in attaining strategic success. Businesses that actively innovate should be prepared to manage the risks associated with market volatility, technological change, and failure of innovation projects. Companies that cultivate an environment of open idea exchange, teamwork and collaboration are more likely to innovate and implement solutions efficiently. It is important to integrate the risk assessment and control system into the corporate structure, which ensures the stability and efficiency of the innovation process. The value of the obtained results lies in the identification of key aspects of innovation management and the formation of practical recommendations for integrating these insights into corporate strategy to enhance the effectiveness of corporate governance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.021
Scholarly communication0.0150.016
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0080.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.183 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations4
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Environmental Law & PolicySame topicEconomic and Business Development StrategiesFrench-language works237,207