Beyond Policy ‘Lock-In’? The Social Economy and Bottom-Up Sustainability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social economy innovation in sustainability is altering policy environments. The activities of green social organizations combine social and ecological missions in ways that pose new questions across sometimes discrete policy silos and levels, identify emergent policy problems and solutions, and generate new alliances of social actors who pressure for ecologically sound and socially “just” change. In this paper we analyze a series of green social economy organizations that integrate social concerns with climate and ecological concerns. In our analysis we discuss their efforts at “bottom-up” social innovation and policy development. We conclude with a critique of the ways in which the culture of policy-making acts as an obstacle to the transition towards a greater sustainable future. L'innovation de l'économie sociale en matière de durabilité transforme les cadres politiques. En combinant une mission sociale et une mission écologique, les activités menées par les organismes d'économie sociale verte soulèvent de nouvelles questions au sein de structures et de niveaux politiques parfois cloisonnés. De plus, ces activités mettent en évidence des problèmes politiques imminents ainsi que des solutions, et engendrent de nouvelles alliances entre des acteurs sociaux qui font pression pour que se produise un changement écologiquement rationnel et socialement juste. Dans cet article, nous analysons plusieurs organismes d'économie sociale verte qui assimilent les problématiques d’ordre social, climatique et environnemental. Nous y discutons des efforts déployés en faveur d'une approche « ascendante » de l'innovation sociale et de l'élaboration de politiques. Nous terminons par une critique des différents obstacles que la culture d'élaboration des politiques oppose à la transition vers un avenir durable meilleur.
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 | 0.009 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
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".