Trans-disciplinary Research: An Academic-Practitioner Partnership Effort on Investigating the Relationship between the Cooperative Model and Sustainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article details novel research methodology developed through a researcher-practitioner partnership and employed in a three-phase research effort that explored relationships between the co-operative model and sustainable development. Firstly, a basic understanding of the characteristics of the co-operative model was established using the co-operative principles as a framework, and their complementarity to sustainable development was examined by comparing them with sustainability theory, principles and best practices (defined through seminal journal articles on the topic). Secondly, relationships between sustainability theory and the ideas and operations of currently functioning co-operatives were investigated, namely, whether co-operatives had integrated sustainability into their organizations. Thirdly, an integrated analysis that examined the relationship between co-operatives, the co-operative principles and sustainability concepts was conducted, and output from this work was used to build a visualization (referred to as the ‘Co-operative Star’), specifically designed to communicate a synthesis of research findings to diverse audiences. This study specifically focused on co-operatives and sustainability; however, the analytical techniques developed and employed have applications for other research involving comparisons between concepts and large bodies of literature, and it is particularly useful for comparing theoretical works (such as academic literature) with texts that discuss operations and practices (such as website and reports).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".