Another World Is Possible—It Is Already Here: A Review and Research Agenda on Alternative Organizing
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Amid multiple crises on a planetary scale, alternative organizing offers plural possibilities for reconfiguring societal relations and bringing into being a more livable world. Despite growing interest, the literature on alternative organizing remains fragmented, marked by a narrow and selective integration of disciplinary and geographic knowledge communities. This fragmentation leads to ambiguities and contradictions in concepts and theory development. To address these issues, we review 50 years of research on alternative organizing, following three steps. First, we map the genealogy of research on alternative organizing, identify its relations with institutional orders, and distinguish key perspectives. Second, we develop an integrative framework that (a) identifies three constitutive dimensions of alternative organizing—imaginaries, alterity, and subjectivities—and (b) synthesizes the processes, frictions, and outcomes for societal transformation. Drawing on this framework, we suggest avenues to attune to the ways alternative organizing unsettles dominant orders and cultivates the present and future, other-wise.
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 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.017 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 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".