Análisis Comparativo de los Marcos Jurídicos e Institucionales de la Gobernanza Corporativa en Estados Unidos y Canadá / Comparative Analysis of the Legal and Institutional Frameworks of Corporate Governance in the United States and Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Resumen Al proceso y procedimientos empleados para administrar un negocio y los temas corporativos que le competen se le llama gobernanza corporativa. En el caso de las entidades públicas deben cumplir con la reglamentación que el gobierno establezca siguiendo sus valores, misión y visión para cumplir con su papel social. En este ensayo se analizan las bolsas de valores de Estados Unidos y de Canadá bajo la Teoría General de Sistemas (TGS), donde cada país aplica prácticas de gobernanza corporativa diametralmente opuestas entre estos vecinos. Uno se ha adaptado a un entorno de lenta evolución que privilegia el individualismo. Mientras el otro promueve prácticas de rápida adaptación al entorno privilegiando la colectividad. El marco jurídico e institucional de la gobernanza corporativa de los países en cuestión está diseñado para aplicarse en ecosistemas diferentes y por ello el resultado es polarizado. En unos cincuenta años se esperaría la estabilización del ecosistema hacia alguna de ambas tendencias, la que tenga mayor poder. Abstract The term corporate’s governance refers to the process and procedures used to manage a business and the corporate matters that it concerns. The public entities must comply with the regulations established by the government, following its values, mission, and vision to fulfill its social role. In this essay, the United States and Canadian stock exchanges are analyzed under the General Systems Theory (TGS). Each country applies corporate’s governance practices diametrically opposed. One has adapted to a slowly evolving environment that favors individualism. While the other promotes practices of rapid adaptation to the environment, privileging the community. The legal framework and institutional framework of corporate’s governance of the countries in this essay are designed to be applied in different ecosystems and therefore the result is polarized. In the next fifty years, the ecosystem stabilization would be expected towards one of both tendencies, the one with the greatest power.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".