The corporate environmental responsibility paradox: a multi-national investigation of business traveller attitudes and their sustainable travel behaviour.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Currently air travel contributes approximately two percent of manmade greenhouse gases each year to the atmosphere and regardless of the introduction of fuel-saving technologies the increase in emissions from air travel is expected to match the forecasted three-fold growth in air travel by 2045[1]. This study investigates the behavior of 679 business travellers from Canada, Russia, Switzerland and the United States all of whom have travelled on business a minimum of three times in the year prior to the survey.\nFindings suggest that, irrespective of nationality, the majority of business travellers want to “do good” in protecting the environment, When it comes to contributing directly to sustainable travel, however, their behavior and levels of commitment are generally subdued with some distinct differences between nationalities.\nSpecial acknowledgement to: Jonathan Day, Purdue University and Oxana Belozerova, North-Caucasus Federal University for data contributions from the USA and Russia\n[1] International Civil Aviation Organization 2019 Working Paper - A40-WP/54 EX/21 5/7/19
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".