MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6922047096 · doi:10.11575/prism/2449

Strategic responses to sustainable development in the Canadian oil and gas industry

2005· other· en· W6922047096 on OpenAlex

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2005
Typeother
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Robotics and Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPetroleum industryReflexivityScarcityNatural resourceContext (archaeology)Resource (disambiguation)Competitive advantageStakeholderSustainable developmentSalient

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this research is to explore the social and environmental forces affecting oil and gas producers in Canada today, and the strategic firm level and industry level responses. The research examines two leading Canadian firms in detailed case studies, as well as range of industry participants and their industry association, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers. The research addresses aspects of firm level strategy and competitive advantage that are emerging as the socio-political environment has become more complex and salient to firms. Limitations to previous research are addressed in the areas of theories of the firm, stakeholder theory, and law. The main findings are that the firm level competencies and resources must be viewed in the context of both natural resource scarcity and social resource scarcity. Furthermore, firms and institutions require dynamic networks extending beyond the industry structure if they are to succeed in interpreting and responding to the business environment. Those networks involve not only the exchange of knowledge, but a challenging of assumptions, or "reflexive" sense-making, much like that advocated by legal theory in the field of reflexive law. This research presents a model of stakeholders and knowledge creation that incorporates reflexive management processes. This research also presents models of "interests-based" firms driven by the need for legitimacy, and new views regarding value creation in a natural and social resource constrained environment.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.856
Threshold uncertainty score0.969

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.184 · 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