Consumer co-operation around the world: ‘Strategic renewal’ since 1980?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This short article reports on an international project that investigates Strategic Renewal in consumer co-operatives. Strategic Renewal refers to the ways an organisation attempts to change itself radically and rapidly, usually in response to an external crisis. The project explores how consumer co-operatives around the world have adapted to changes in the business environment over the last forty years and investigates whether those changes can be described as Strategic Renewal. A book based on the project published by Routledge (in press) includes case studies from consumer co‑operatives in the UK, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Italy, France, Canada, Australia, South Korea, and Japan. The academic findings suggest that iterative, piecemeal, adaptive change is more appropriate for co-operatives than completely overhauling the business, leading the authors to conclude that co‑operative Strategic Renewal is a slower and messier process than the literature suggests. In practical terms, awareness of initiatives in other countries can help consumer co-operatives to investigate initiatives which might be adapted to local conditions.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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".