Resposta estratégica às mudanças climáticas globais: o caso de duas multinacionais do setor de alumínio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Climate change as a global issue in its causes and consequences require international cooperation and leadership. In this context, multinational corporations play a special role as they operate globally and deal with various issues, actors and institutional contexts. The greatest climate challenge for companies refers to the ability to reduce costs and risks related to their business, what can be achieved through the development of a broad and clear strategy able to face the transition to a low carbon market and gather new and unique opportunities. Thus, this work aims to identify and compare the strategic responses to global climate change of two multinational corporations in the aluminum industry taking into account their subsidiaries, one located in Canada and the other in Brazil. Hence, we developed a conceptual framework addressing the main drivers (establishment and development of regulations, competitive requirements and public perception) and steps (business exposure to carbon, taking action – market strategies, and influencing the policy development process – political strategies) involved in the building process of climate strategies by a corporation. The methodology used in this paper refers to a multiple case study involving two corporations in the aluminum industry (MNC-A e MNC-B) taking into account their subsidiaries in Canada (MNC-ACan) and Brazil (MNC-BBra). The strategic responses to climate change of these corporations were analyzed and described using the pattern matching technique and subsequently compared using the cross-case syntheses technique. The study concludes that climate change is still an uncertain and conflicting issue regarding the performance of companies and governments. The regulatory environment appears as a potential driver, compromised by political uncertainties at international and mainly national levels, hence allowing highly discretionary actions by companies. In this context of lacking clear and enforceable standards, the market environment predominates, favoring the compliance with competitive requisites, such as cost and efficiency improvement.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".