MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416003610 · doi:10.5465/amproc.2025.460bp

Pathways to Violence

2025· article· en· W4416003610 on OpenAlexaff
Lukshmee Saravanapavan, Matthew Murphy

Bibliographic record

VenueAcademy of Management Proceedings · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicQualitative Comparative Analysis Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Victoria
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAgency (philosophy)Multinational corporationStakeholderState (computer science)Economic JusticeQualitative comparative analysisQualitative analysisStakeholder analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper studies the formal institutional structural conditions which lead to violence in conflicts between marginalized communities like rural stakeholders and mining firms. Using fuzzy-set Qualitative Comparative Analysis (fsQCA), we examine 77 rural environmental justice conflicts involving multinational mining companies in resource-dependent nations between 2010 and 2020. Our analysis produces two configurations leading to violent conflicts and two configurations to absence of violence. Our findings extend current research on Stakeholder Influence Strategies by showing the agency of marginalized stakeholder, and that contrary to current characterization they may not always be the actors using disruptive, aggressive tactics in conflicts. Our results show how violence may emerge in some configurations from the actions of stakeholders considered more legitimate in stakeholder theory like firms, and state actors.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.011
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.001

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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.445
Teacher spread0.355 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcademy of Management ProceedingsSame topicQualitative Comparative Analysis ResearchFrench-language works237,207