MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115072330 · doi:10.1111/apce.70034

Gender equity in the social economy: Achievements, limitations and challenges for transformation

2025· article· en· W7115072330 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnals of Public and Cooperative Economics · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCooperative Studies and Economics
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
FundersEusko Jaurlaritza
KeywordsTransformative learningCorporate governanceContext (archaeology)Equity (law)DemocracySolidaritySocial transformationSocial justiceSocial reproductionFeminism

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This introductory article examines the relationship between gender and the social economy (SE) within the broader context of alternative forms of business and organization. Building on recent research and insights from the diverse contributions gathered in this special issue, the analysis aims to identify key gender‐related challenges facing SE organizations, including the persistence of structural inequalities, the underrepresentation of women and gender minorities in leadership and decision‐making, the undervaluation of care work and the reproduction of traditional gender norms even within democratic governance models. Analysed through the lenses of feminist economics and intersectionality, these challenges reveal both the transformative potential and the internal tensions of the social and solidarity economy. They also highlight how feminist and cooperative principles can converge to promote equity, participation, and sustainability, while underscoring the need for intersectional, evidence‐based approaches and institutional reforms to achieve genuine equality. By bringing these perspectives together, the special issue advances current debates on how the SSE can foster gender justice and democratic renewal across economic sectors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.845
Threshold uncertainty score0.362

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.321
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.030 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnals of Public and Cooperative EconomicsSame topicCooperative Studies and EconomicsFrench-language works237,207