Développement communautaire et Caisses Desjardins: quelles passerelles?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les relations partenariales entre anciennes et nouvelles composantes de l'économie sociale revêtent une importance stratégique. Ces passerelles pourraient en effet d'une part, contribuer au renouvellement communautaire (associatif) d'organisations anciennes comme les caisses d'épargne et de crédit du Mouvement Desjardins. Elles pourraient d'autre part, contribuer au renforcement de la dimension économique d'organisations nouvelles comme les corporations de développement économique communautaires (CDEC). Pour comprendre cette dynamique nous avons étudié, dans le cadre des travaux de l'équipe économie sociale du CRISES (Centre de recherche sur les innovations sociales dans l'économie sociale, les entreprises et les syndicats), la configuration partenariale des caisses et d'une CDEC d'un arrondissement de Montréal. On constatera que leur partenariat se concrétise dans une Société locale d'investissement dans le développement de l'emploi (SOLIDE) dont le modèle provient d'une grande composante syndicale de l'économie sociale : le Fonds de solidarité des travailleurs de la FTQ. C'est donc dans un cadre structurant que les passerelles entre caisses et CDEC prennent forme.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 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".