The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
From Moby Dick to Free Willy: Macro-Cultural Discourse and Institutional Entrepreneurship in Emerging Institutional Fields
Abstract
In this paper, we draw on a case study of the development of commercial whale-watching on Canada’s west coast to explore the role of macro-cultural discourse and local actors in the structuration of new institutional fields. We argue that the development of the commercial whale-watching industry in the area was made possible by broad macrocultural changes in the conceptualization of whales in North America. At the same time, however, the characteristics of the geographically distinct institutional fields that emerged depended on local action and the processes of structuration that those actions supported. The constitution of specific new fields required interested actors to engage in the institutional innovation and isomorphism that produced the unique networks of relationships and sets of institutions that constituted those fields.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Discovery of Grounded Theory; Strategies for Qualitative Research
Glaser, B. G., Strauss, A. L., & Strutzel, E. (1968) · Nursing Research · doi:10.1097/00006199-196807000-00014 · Cited by 39,449
Gambell, R. (1993) · ARCTIC · doi:10.14430/arctic1330 · Cited by 71
Management by Totemization: Whale Symbolism and the Anti-Whaling Campaign
Kalland, A. (1993) · ARCTIC · doi:10.14430/arctic1333 · Cited by 64 · cited 4×
“much more widely since the scientific discourse again began to support limited catches (Kalland, 1993; Stoett, 1997).”
BackgroundInfluential
Cited by
Institutional Complexity and Organizational Responses
Greenwood, R., Raynard, M., Kodeih, F., Micelotta, E. R., & Lounsbury, M. (2011) · Academy of Management Annals · doi:10.5465/19416520.2011.590299 · Cited by 3,519
Institutions and Institutional Work
Lawrence, T. B., & Suddaby, R. (2006) · The SAGE Handbook of Organization Studies · doi:10.4135/9781848608030.n7 · Cited by 3,338
Self-citationEntrepreneurship in and around institutional voids: A case study from Bangladesh
Mair, J., & Marti, I. (2009) · Journal of Business Venturing · doi:10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.04.006 · Cited by 1,567
Social Entrepreneurship: Why We Don't Need a New Theory and How We Move Forward From Here
Dacin, P. A., Dacin, M. T., & Matear, M. (2010) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2010.52842950 · Cited by 1,527
Conceptualizing Historical Organization Studies
Maclean, M., Harvey, C., & Clegg, S. R. (2016) · Academy of Management Review · doi:10.5465/amr.2014.0133 · Cited by 410
‘Feeding 9 billion people’: global food security debates and the productionist trap
Fouilleux, E., Bricas, N., & Alpha, A. (2017) · Journal of European Public Policy · doi:10.1080/13501763.2017.1334084 · Cited by 137
Metadata
- Authors
- Lawrence, T. B., & Phillips, N.
- Venue
- Organization
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2004-09
- Volume
- 11
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 689-711
- ISSN
- 1350-5084 (ISSN-L)
- 1461-7323
- OpenAlex
- W2118769685
- Cited by
- 433
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 13.63
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
