MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534686978 · doi:10.22230/cjnser.2010v1n1a26

Living Economics: Canadian Perspectives on the Social Economy, Co-operatives, and Community Economic Development

2010· article· en· W1534686978 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Marcelo Vieta

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy research · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunity economic developmentSocial economyEconomicsCommunity developmentEconomic growthEconomyEconomic systemMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Canadian social economy is thriving.From thousands of co-operatives to hundreds of community economic development projects and from myriad non-profits to a burgeoning number of social enterprise initiatives, Canada's social economy encompasses a wide array of alternative economic practices serving most communities in all regions of the country.But, despite a multi-billion-dollar force within the Canadian economy, the social economy is highly contested among academics, policymakers, and even practitioners, who argue about how to conceptualize it and what practices it encompasses.In fact, Canada's social economy is not yet very well understood, even by those who work within it.As J. J. McMurtry perceptively points out in his introductory chapter to his edited book Living Economics: Canadian Perspectives on the Social Economy, Co-operatives, and Community Economic Development, this lack of understanding is surprising, given the global surge in social economic activity in response to the negative aspects of the neoliberal order of the past three or so decades.As McMurtry further emphasizes, any meaningful conceptualization of the social economy must come to terms with how social needs ground economic practices, as well as the normative (or ethical) dimensions necessarily contained therein.Conceptualizing the social economy in this way, McMurtry suggests, is important for several reasons.Such a conceptualization assists in including the myriad diverse practices and life needs engaged within the social economy.It helps practitioners to come to know that they are indeed part of the social economy, it aids in influencing much-needed policies (especially in English Canada), and it helps in building a robust and recognizable social economy "movement."For McMurtry, by carefully considering the social economy as a guiding concept, practitioners and researchers can coalesce around "articulating [social] needs beyond the Vol. 1, No 1 Fall /Automne 2010 105 -109

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.128
Threshold uncertainty score0.930

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0050.012
Science and technology studies0.0100.020
Scholarly communication0.0130.006
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations24
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueCanadian journal of nonprofit and social economy researchSame topicCooperative Studies and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207