Governance, Social Acceptability, and Organizational Learning in Public Infrastructure Projects
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
While public infrastructure projects face frequent challenges related to social acceptability, the relationship between these projects’ governance and social acceptability has been overlooked. Yet, governance plays a crucial role in generating practices and policies that facilitate the development of social acceptability. This article elaborates on a conceptual framework of the processual governance dynamics of public infrastructure projects, which bridges project governance and social acceptability literatures in the context of public infrastructure projects. An organizational learning framework is introduced, which portrays strategies that encourage stakeholder engagement and ensure alignment with sustainable development principles. Building on this, the article offers two contributions to the literature. First, it theoretically grounds the interrelations among governance, social acceptability, and organizational learning. Second, it develops a practical analytical tool that can serve as a roadmap for organizations that aim to improve their socially responsible project management practices.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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