Sustainability in Women’s Cooperatives: A Qualitative Study from a Stakeholder Theory Perspective

Abstract

Growing global challenges have made it imperative to evaluate economic activities not only in terms of economic growth but also from the perspectives of environmental and social well-being. Within this context, Women’s Production and Business Cooperatives have emerged as critical collective initiatives that support local development. In this study, “Women’s Production and Business Cooperatives” refer to cooperatives established and predominantly managed by women to collectively engage in the production and commercialization of goods and services, generate income and employment opportunities for their members, and promote women’s economic and social empowerment. Hereafter, these organizations are referred to as “women’s cooperatives.” However, studies that comprehensively examine the sustainability practices of women’s cooperatives through the framework of Elkington’s Triple Bottom Line (economic, social, and environmental sustainability) remain limited. From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, cooperatives are regarded as organizations that extend beyond the pursuit of economic profit by creating value for both internal and external stakeholders, including women, local communities, the environment, consumers, and public institutions. Accordingly, this study aims to provide an in-depth examination of the sustainability practices adopted by women’s cooperatives within these three dimensions, as well as to identify the challenges they encounter. This study adopted a qualitative research design, utilizing in-depth interviews with seven presidents and managers representing women’s cooperatives. The findings suggest that zero-waste practices, the adoption of circular economy principles, and the transition toward green agriculture constitute the primary sustainability initiatives, whereas high technology and packaging costs, together with insufficient institutional collaboration, represent the major challenges to the environmental sustainability. Within the economic sustainability dimension, the findings indicate that the participating cooperatives have increasingly shifted toward industrial production standards, value-added by-products, and business-to-business (B2B) marketing strategies. Nevertheless, rising input and logistics costs, together with unfair competition, continue to pose significant challenges. As relates to social sustainability, the findings highlight intergenerational transmission of cultural heritage, psychosocial recovery, efforts to challenge social prejudice, inter-cooperative solidarity, and the allocation of resources for social benefit, including scholarship support. Overall, the findings reveal that these cooperatives make meaningful contributions to multidimensional sustainability and stakeholder well-being, thereby providing valuable empirical insights into the sustainability literature.

1. Introduction

Today, increasingly intensifying environmental crises and social inequalities have made it imperative to replace traditional economic growth models with a multidimensional understanding of sustainability. Cooperatives are collective organizational structures established to meet the economic and social needs of their members on the basis of mutual solidarity and cooperation [1]. Within this framework, the objectives of women’s cooperatives extend beyond generating economic benefits; they also provide social benefits by promoting women’s socialization, personal development, solidarity, and collective engagement [2]. In particular, women’s cooperatives operating in local and rural economies contribute both to local development and to the economic empowerment of women through their activities in agricultural production, food processing, handicrafts, and local tourism [3].

Corporate sustainability is explained through the concept of the Triple Bottom Line, developed by Elkington [4]. This concept comprises three distinct dimensions: economic, environmental, and social sustainability [5]. At the core of cooperatives lies the aspiration to achieve sustainability at both the economic and social levels [6]. The environmental dimension encompasses awareness of climate change, population growth, and the impacts of human activities on the environment [7]. The social dimension covers all issues related to society, including human rights, gender equality, personal security, and relationships with the environment [8]. For cooperatives, the economic dimension extends beyond the financial figures reported in balance sheets. Cooperatives are required not only to compete in the marketplace and create economic value but also to safeguard the social interests of their members [1].

The existing body of research on cooperative sustainability has largely focused on the economic dimensions of cooperatives [8,9,10,11]. Comparatively fewer studies have examined the social and environmental dimensions of cooperatives [12]. Some studies have investigated the social and economic dimensions in an integrated manner [13,14]. Although cooperatives have a substantial impact on the environment, this issue has generally not been addressed directly; rather, it has primarily been discussed within the context of environmental sustainability awards [15]. The literature contains only a limited number of studies that examine cooperative sustainability in an integrated manner across the three dimensions of sustainability [16,17,18]. Sustainability studies have predominantly been conducted in the context of agricultural cooperatives [15,19,20,21,22,23].

A considerable body of literature has examined women’s cooperatives [24,25,26,27,28,29,30,31,32,33,34,35]. These studies have primarily addressed women’s cooperatives in the context of economic empowerment, social solidarity, and local development. However, there remains a gap in the literature regarding sustainability studies that specifically focus on women’s cooperatives [36]. Most activities carried out by women’s cooperatives are based on the use of local resources and the continuation of traditional production methods. This indicates that women’s cooperatives possess significant potential in terms of environmental sustainability [37].

According to the cooperative establishment statistics published by the Ministry of Trade for the most recent six-month period, women’s production and business cooperatives—a legal form of cooperative established to promote women’s entrepreneurship and economic participation—constitute a significant share of newly established cooperatives in Türkiye. The data examined for the period from November 2025 to April 2026 indicate both the increasing visibility of women’s cooperatives within the entrepreneurial ecosystem and their growing strategic importance in the context of sustainable development policies (Ministry of Trade Cooperative Data Bulletins, November 2025; December 2025; January 2026; February 2026; March 2026; April 2026). Recent research has emphasized that women’s cooperatives represent important mechanisms for promoting women’s economic empowerment, social inclusion, and sustainable local development. Nevertheless, these organizations continue to face structural barriers related to access to finance, legal and institutional frameworks, and socio-cultural norms, which constrain their long-term sustainability [38].

The motivation of this study is to demonstrate the importance of sustainability practices for women’s cooperatives, identify the challenges they encounter and propose solutions to address these challenges. In this context, this study aims to contribute to the sustainability literature by examining the perspectives of representatives of women’s cooperatives not only on environmental sustainability, but also on economic and social sustainability. Accordingly, the following research questions were formulated:

RQ1: What are the practices of women’s cooperatives toward the dimensions of sustainability?

RQ2: What challenges do women’s cooperatives encounter in their sustainability efforts?

The primary contribution of this study lies in identifying the sustainability practices adopted by women’s cooperatives and developing recommendations to address the challenges they encounter in implementing these practices. Accordingly, the findings are expected to provide practical guidance for other women’s cooperatives in planning and improving their sustainability practices while also contributing to the development of effective collaboration models by identifying the key stakeholders with whom they can cooperate to address sustainability-related challenges.

The sample included one women’s cooperative from each of the country’s seven geographical regions. In-depth interviews were then conducted with these seven cooperatives, all of which were selected because they actively implement sustainability practices. This study consists of eight sections. Following the introduction, the second section presents the conceptual framework by examining the sustainability practices of women’s cooperatives from the economic, environmental, and social dimensions. The third section describes the research methodology. The fourth section analyzes the research findings. The fifth section discusses the theoretical contributions of this study. The sixth section evaluates the conclusions and discussion. The seventh section presents the managerial implications derived from the research findings. Finally, the eighth section outlines the limitations and provides directions for future research.

2. Stakeholder Theory

Stakeholder Theory argues that organizations should create value not only for shareholders but also for a broad range of stakeholders, including employees, customers, suppliers, local communities, and the natural environment [39,40]. Rather than focusing exclusively on financial returns, these organizations seek to promote the socio-economic empowerment of women while simultaneously contributing to local development by strengthening local supply chains and supporting community well-being [41]. Under the corporate Stakeholder Theory Approach, a company survives by attending to a range of constituent groups rather than focusing solely on shareholders. According to this theory, the fundamental role of the firm is to ensure its own continued existence; however, this must be achieved by maximizing the company’s total value—based on the interests of all stakeholders—and distributing that value fairly among all beneficiaries [42]. From the perspective of theory, sustainable organizations are viewed as entities that successfully integrate corporate continuity with the goals of a sustainable world, thereby making a positive contribution to that world while preserving their own existence. To align with the concept of a sustainable world, theory must be compatible with the notion of an enduring company—a concept that encompasses the principle of prioritizing a sustainable world [43]. Through participatory decision-making, democratic governance, cooperation with local stakeholders, and the reinvestment of generated surpluses into social initiatives such as education and scholarship programs, women’s cooperatives create value for multiple stakeholder groups. Consequently, Stakeholder Theory provides an appropriate analytical framework for understanding how women’s cooperatives balance economic, social, and environmental objectives while creating shared value for their stakeholders.

3. Sustainability Practices of Women’s Cooperatives

Women’s cooperatives have emerged as a distinctive organizational model aimed at strengthening women’s participation in economic life, reducing gender-based inequalities, and promoting local development and social empowerment [27,44,45,46]. Women’s cooperatives primarily operate in areas such as agricultural production, food processing, local gastronomy, handicrafts, care services, and rural tourism. These activities contribute to the effective utilization of local resources while strengthening regional value chains. Particularly in rural areas, women’s cooperatives contribute to increasing the visibility of women’s informal labour and enable women to achieve economic independence by generating income. In this respect, women’s cooperatives are positioned at the intersection of local development policies and gender equality strategies (Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Trade, 2025–2029).

Public support mechanisms play a crucial role in strengthening the institutional capacity of women’s cooperatives. The 2025–2029 Türkiye Cooperative Strategy and Action Plan, published by the Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Trade, places particular emphasis on women’s cooperatives. The document identifies facilitating women’s cooperatives’ access to finance, enabling them to benefit more effectively from credit and support mechanisms, and strengthening their institutional capacities as key strategic objectives (Republic of Türkiye Ministry of Trade, 2025–2029). In addition, supporting cooperatives’ adaptation to green and digital transformation processes, promoting environmentally responsible production models, and enhancing resource efficiency are identified as strategic priorities. This policy approach suggests that women’s cooperatives should be regarded not only as economic actors but also as organizations that promote sustainable production and demonstrate environmental responsibility.

3.1. Environmental Sustainability in Women’s Cooperatives

Women’s cooperatives play an important role in the conservation of natural resources [47], the preservation of biodiversity for future generations, and the development of environmentally sustainable initiatives [11,48,49]. In addition, cooperatives facilitate access to products and services while contributing to the achievement of sustainability goals [50]. They also help reduce operational risks while generating environmental benefits through improvements in supply chain efficiency [11,47]. Environmental sustainability practices encompass a broad range of activities, including waste and pollution reduction, energy conservation, recycling, organic agriculture, efficient water use, biodiversity conservation, soil protection, the adoption of renewable energy and environmentally friendly technologies, the use of sustainable materials, emission reduction, minimizing hazardous substances, and preventing environmental accidents [51,52].

Furthermore, adopting production and management practices that minimize adverse environmental impacts constitutes one of the fundamental dimensions of environmental sustainability. Within this context, cooperatives undertake various initiatives, including promoting organic agriculture [53], supporting sustainable agricultural production [54], improving resource efficiency [55,56], adopting environmentally friendly production practices [57], and encouraging innovative agricultural practices [12,58,59]. For example, cooperatives implement soil conservation [60,61] and water conservation practices [62,63]. In developing countries, including India and several African countries, some cooperatives also contribute to sustainable energy goals by improving energy efficiency and reducing greenhouse gas emissions [11].

Studies examining women’s cooperatives within the context of sustainability and local development have generally focused on sustainable rural tourism, local production, and participatory design approaches [24,64]. These studies indicate that women’s cooperatives can contribute to sustainable development through production activities based on local resources. However, most existing studies primarily evaluate sustainability from the perspective of production models while giving relatively limited attention to the environmental awareness of cooperative members and treating green production practices and innovation capacity as secondary considerations.

3.2. Economic Sustainability in Women’s Cooperatives

Economic sustainability refers to an organization’s ability to maintain its financial performance while ensuring the equitable distribution of economic benefits, fostering innovation, and creating long-term value for its stakeholders. This approach seeks to balance organizational economic objectives with broader societal interests. Within this context, cooperatives contribute to economic sustainability by promoting equitable income distribution, expanding the benefits of economic growth, and supporting local development [65].

Cooperative structures encourage women’s participation in production, thereby strengthening their capacity to generate income, achieve financial independence, and receive fair returns for their labour, ultimately enhancing their economic empowerment and participation in society [26,66]. Women’s cooperatives play an important role, particularly in rural areas, by increasing women’s participation in the labour force and contributing to both regional and national economic and social development. The economic sustainability of cooperatives depends not only on their financial performance but also on their commercial viability and long-term economic resilience.

Despite increasing sales revenues, however, many women’s cooperatives struggle to achieve satisfactory levels of profitability because of rising input costs, administrative expenses, and limited profit margins. These challenges weaken their ability to generate sufficient working capital and may threaten their long-term financial sustainability. At the operational level, inadequate equipment and machinery disrupt production processes, undermine productivity, and constrain the ability to achieve consistent product standardization and quality [67].

Furthermore, limited pricing power undermines their competitive position in the marketplace, while restricted access to credit and financial support significantly constrains their ability to pursue growth and make necessary investments. Bureaucratic procedures, consultancy costs, the complexity of project application processes, and foreign-language barriers further restrict women’s cooperatives’ ability to benefit from available funding mechanisms [68].

Limited access to markets and marketing channels often results in unsold inventories and subsequent financial losses [69]. The adoption of digital sales channels also remains constrained by limited technical knowledge and inadequate digital infrastructure [70]. Consequently, women’s cooperatives often face limited innovation capacity, increasing financial pressures, and high levels of indebtedness [71]. These challenges create financial risks [72] and may ultimately undermine the long-term economic sustainability of women’s cooperatives [12].

3.3. Social Sustainability in Women’s Cooperatives

Social sustainability is based not only on meeting individuals’ basic needs but also on addressing their social and cultural needs, thereby contributing to overall societal well-being [73]. In this context, social sustainability contributes to social development by promoting the reduction in social inequalities, integrating democratic values, diversity, and human rights into organizational decision-making processes, and strengthening social capital [74,75].

From the perspective of cooperatives, social sustainability encompasses the promotion of decent working conditions, social development, the improvement in educational standards, the preservation of cultural diversity [76], and the advancement of social justice [77]. By providing women with opportunities to participate in decision-making, women’s cooperatives empower them, promote social justice, and enable women to participate directly in social life, production processes, and the distribution of products to consumers, thereby allowing them to play an active role in shaping their own futures [78]. In doing so, women’s cooperatives support social structures that positively influence the lives of women and their families in multiple dimensions [26,79], reduce gender inequalities, and strengthen community solidarity [11,80].

A comprehensive review of the literature indicates that research on women’s cooperatives has predominantly focused on economic empowerment, social solidarity, and local development [81,82]. In contrast, studies that empirically examine how these cooperatives approach environmental, social, and economic sustainability practices in a holistic manner are quite limited. In particular, there is a significant lack of empirical research on the challenges that women’s cooperatives face when implementing these multi-dimensional sustainability practices [83]. This highlights a significant research gap in the existing literature. The adoption of sustainable production practices by women’s cooperatives may be influenced not only by economic conditions, but also by environmental and social factors. To address this gap, the present study empirically investigates the sustainability practices and fundamental challenges of women’s cooperatives operating across the seven geographical regions of Türkiye, utilizing a comprehensive approach grounded in the Triple Bottom Line and Stakeholder Theory frameworks.

4. Methodology

4.1. Research Method

This study employed an in-depth interview technique. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with presidents and managers representing women’s cooperatives. The interview guide was organized into three sections. The first section explored the participants’ understanding of the concept of sustainability, the extent to which sustainability is reflected in the activities of their cooperatives, how sustainability is incorporated into these activities, and its perceived contributions. The second section examined the environmental and economic sustainability practices reported by the participating cooperative representatives, together with the challenges encountered by their cooperatives. The third section focused on the social sustainability practices reported by the participating cooperative representatives. To protect participants’ anonymity, each interviewee was assigned the code “C” (C1–C7), and all identifying information relating to the cooperatives was treated confidentially throughout the analysis.

Table 1. Demographic Profiles of the Cooperatives.

Cooperative	Year Established	Number of Members	Region of Operation	Primary Area of Activity
C1	2014	Not specified	Mediterranean Region	Food production and handicrafts
C2	2019	9	Central Anatolia	Agricultural production
C3	2020	14	Eastern Anatolia	Gastronomy and local production
C4	2011	23	Southeastern Anatolia	Agriculture and food production
C5	Not specified	17	Marmara Region	Food production and handicrafts
C6	2019	61	Black Sea Region	Agriculture and food production
C7	2014	17	Aegean Region	Food production and handicrafts

presents the structural characteristics of the seven women’s cooperatives (C1–C7) included in this study. One cooperative from each of Türkiye’s seven geographical regions was purposively selected based on its active implementation of sustainability practices. The selected cooperatives represent diverse geographical contexts and vary in terms of their year of establishment (2011–2020), organizational size (9–61 members), and primary fields of activity, including food production, agriculture, and handicrafts. This purposeful sampling strategy was adopted to capture a diverse range of organizational experiences and sustainability practices, thereby providing a rich empirical foundation for the subsequent thematic analysis.

As presented in

Table 2. Profile of the Participants.

Participant Code	Region Represented	Role in the Cooperative	Main Responsibilities	Experience in the Cooperative
C1	Mediterranean Region	President	Coordinating cooperative activities, participating in production processes, and representing the cooperative	Approximately 6–7 years
C2	Central Anatolia	President	Strategic management, institutional representation, coordination of cooperative activities, and decision-making processes	7 years
C3	Eastern Anatolia	Founding President	Cooperative management, project development, production coordination, and stakeholder engagement	6 years
C4	Southeastern Anatolia	Founding President	Overall management, production planning, stakeholder relations, project coordination, and organizational development	15 years
C5	Marmara Region	President	Cooperative management, marketing activities, institutional development, and coordination of production processes	7 years
C6	Black Sea Region	Cooperative Member and Operation Manager	Operation management, project development, grant administration, digital marketing, and organizational coordination	4 years
C7	Aegean Region	Founding President	Strategic management, institutional representation, product development, coordination of local partnerships, and organizational planning	12 years

, all participants held leadership or managerial positions within their respective cooperatives, serving as president, founding president, or operation manager. Their responsibilities included strategic management, production planning, stakeholder engagement, project coordination, and organizational development. The participants’ experience within their cooperatives ranged from approximately 4 to 15 years, indicating substantial familiarity with their cooperatives’ organizational structures, operational processes, and relationships with institutional support mechanisms. This level of experience enabled the participants to provide in-depth managerial perspectives on the sustainability practices and challenges examined in this study.

4.2. Research Sample

Participants were selected from among the founders, presidents, and managers of women’s cooperatives. Given their direct involvement in the management and decision-making processes of their cooperatives, they possessed first-hand knowledge of organizational sustainability practices, operational processes, stakeholder relationships, and institutional experiences. Consequently, they were well positioned to provide in-depth managerial perspectives on the sustainability practices and challenges examined in this study.

Purposive sampling was adopted as the primary sampling strategy to identify information-rich cases relevant to the research objectives. Accordingly, the following inclusion criteria were established: (i) being an actively operating Women’s Production and Business Cooperative; (ii) having implemented environmental, economic, and social sustainability practices; (iii) having managerial representatives with sufficient knowledge and experience to provide detailed information regarding these practices; and (iv) voluntarily agreeing to participate in this research. To ensure regional diversity, one cooperative from each of Türkiye’s seven geographical regions was purposively included during the research design process.

Snowball sampling was employed as a complementary recruitment strategy within the broader purposive sampling framework. This technique facilitates access to hard-to-reach participants, reduces data collection time, and increases response rates [84,85]. The recruitment process began through the Women’s Cooperatives Union, which facilitated contact with the first participant, a cooperative president from the Aegean Region. Subsequent participants were identified through referrals from previously interviewed cooperative representatives, thereby facilitating a more systematic participant recruitment process.

A total of fourteen cooperatives were contacted and invited to participate in this study. Several cooperatives either did not respond to the invitation or were unable to participate. Consequently, the final sample comprised seven women’s cooperatives, with one cooperative representing each of Türkiye’s seven geographical regions, all of which met the predefined inclusion criteria. The final sample size reflected the purposive research design, which sought to include one cooperative representing each of Türkiye’s seven geographical regions. In qualitative research, sample size is determined not to achieve statistical generalization but to obtain rich, context-specific, and in-depth information. As data collection progressed, recurring themes and patterns emerged across the interviews, indicating that the collected data provided sufficient depth to address the research questions.

Data were collected in 2026 through semi-structured, in-depth interviews conducted online via Microsoft Teams with the seven participating cooperative representatives. The interviews ranged from 55 to 106 min, with an average duration of approximately 82 min, totaling 576 min. With the participants’ informed consent, all interviews were audio-recorded in Turkish, the native language of both the participants and the researchers. The recordings were transcribed verbatim in Turkish. To ensure data rigor, the coding and thematic analysis were carried out using the original Turkish transcripts, and only the selected illustrative quotations were translated into English for reporting purposes. Before the coding process, all transcripts were read repeatedly by the research team to ensure familiarity with the data and to facilitate the subsequent thematic analysis.

4.3. Data Analysis

The data analysis was based on the qualitative content analysis process and a hybrid thematic analysis approach was adopted by Bengtsson (2016) [86,87]. This method enables the systematic evaluation of participants’ views by integrating related data within conceptual frameworks. To achieve this, a hybrid two-stage analytical process integrating both deductive and inductive approaches was adopted.

In the first stage, drawing on Elkington’s Triple Bottom Line (TBL) framework, which constitutes the theoretical foundation of this study, three overarching themes—environmental sustainability, economic sustainability, and social sustainability—were established deductively a priori to guide the analytical process.

In the second stage, the subthemes and codes within these overarching themes were developed inductively based directly on the participants’ narratives. The transcribed interview data were reviewed in detail to identify meaningful segments, and the expressions most frequently emphasized by the participants were assigned initial codes. These codes were subsequently grouped according to their conceptual similarities to develop the final subthemes. Thus, while the theoretical framework guided the overall analytical process, the subthemes emerged directly from the empirical data. The qualitative data analysis was conducted manually without the use of qualitative data analysis software.

To ensure the reliability and consistency of the analysis, all interviews were conducted in Turkish, audio-recorded with participants’ permission, transcribed verbatim, and subsequently translated into English for reporting. Prior to coding, the research team repeatedly reviewed the transcripts to become thoroughly familiar with the data. The transcripts were independently coded by two researchers. Following the initial coding phase, these two researchers jointly reviewed the generated codes and themes; any differences in interpretation were discussed collectively until consensus was reached regarding the final thematic structure. Because the analysis was conducted on Turkish transcripts, the participant quotations included in the manuscript were translated into English by the researchers, with careful attention paid to preserving their original meaning and contextual integrity. The accuracy and conceptual consistency of these translations were subsequently verified by all members of the research team. Throughout the Findings section, the identified themes and subthemes are supported by direct participant quotations to maintain a clear connection between the analytical interpretations and the participants’ original statements.

4.4. Validity and Reliability of This Study

To enhance the validity and reliability of the research findings, member checking was conducted by sharing the preliminary findings with the participants and obtaining their feedback and confirmation [88]. The sample size was determined through a purposive sampling strategy that sought to include one Women’s Production and Business Cooperative from each of Türkiye’s seven geographical regions. As data collection progressed, recurring themes and patterns emerged across the interviews, indicating that the collected data provided sufficient depth to address the research questions [89]. In addition, to enhance the consistency and credibility of the findings, the researchers discussed the identified codes, categories, and themes until consensus was reached regarding the final thematic structure [90].

4.5. Ethical Considerations

This study was conducted in accordance with the fundamental principles of research ethics. Prior to the interviews, participants were briefed on the purpose, scope, and procedures of this study and were assured that the collected data would be used solely for scientific research purposes. Participation was entirely voluntary, and participants were informed of their right to withdraw from the interview at any stage without providing a reason or to decline answering any question they did not wish to answer. The interview questions were designed to explore the sustainability practices of women’s cooperatives and did not seek to elicit sensitive personal information. Participants were free to decide which experiences they wished to share, and any personal experiences discussed during the interviews were disclosed voluntarily at their own discretion.

Before the interviews commenced, informed consent, including permission for audio recording, was obtained from all participants. To ensure confidentiality, participants’ identities were protected, and all interviews were anonymized. Both the cooperatives and the participants were identified using the codes C1–C7 throughout this study. All interview recordings and transcripts were stored securely and remained accessible only to the research team.

4.6. Research Findings

The research findings are presented in three parts. The first part examines the interviewed cooperative representatives’ perspectives on sustainability. The second part details the environmental and economic practices they reported, along with the challenges encountered in implementation. The third part explores their reported social sustainability practices.

4.6.1. The Concept of Sustainability in Women’s Cooperatives

The participants conceptualized sustainability as extending beyond a purely theoretical concept. Rather, they described it as a practical approach embedded in the struggle for survival, the protection of natural resources, the preservation of cultural heritage, and the pursuit of social existence. According to the participants, sustainability is perceived not merely as a mechanism for economic profit, but rather as a holistic “life cycle” and a responsibility toward future generations. Based on the codes identified through the interviews, the findings indicate that the participants associated sustainability not only with a “green environment,” but also with the preservation and transmission of traditional culture and heritage to future generations, a self-renewing business model, the continuity of economic activities, and a balance between economic continuity and social development.

The interview analysis indicates that participants conceptualized sustainability as encompassing not only environmental protection but also the transmission of local culture, traditional products, and region-specific raw materials to future generations. The findings further indicate that the participating cooperatives enhance the visibility of local products and contribute to preserving local traditions by developing products based on cultural memory. Presented under different names and in innovative forms, these products attract attention because they evoke cultural memory and foster a sense of belonging [91,92]. The participants further described sustainability as a continuous life cycle and a process of cultural transmission, defined as “passing on the traditional values learned from mothers and grandmothers to grandchildren by adapting them to contemporary conditions.”

“…It is an intangible cultural heritage. …She prepares it in the way she learned from her mother. Your grandmother learned it from her elders, you have used it and improved it, and now you pass it on to your grandchildren.”

(C7)

“They also cooked together with women over the age of 55. They had the opportunity to learn dishes that reflected their past and their culture in the field of gastronomy. […] We are potentially selling a culture…”

(C6)

• A Self-Renewing and Sustainable Business Model

The interviews indicate that the participants defined sustainability as a business model capable of sustaining and renewing itself even after external grants and support mechanisms have ended [93]. The findings further indicate that the participants regarded transforming initial grants into long-term value and ensuring the continued viability of the organizational structure beyond external support as fundamental objectives of sustainability.

“…A model that can renew itself… one that does not become exhausted over time… We receive these grants, but eventually those grants come to an end… The important question is how we can sustain this model, how we can contribute to its continuity, and how it can continue to contribute to our production. I see it as a production model that generates sufficient financial resources, psychological benefits, and sociological benefits to enable new people to become part of the system.”

(C5)

• Balancing Economic Continuity and Social Development

According to the findings, the participants regarded economic sustainability as the primary foundation for achieving social sustainability in women’s cooperatives. The findings further suggest that maintaining the commercial viability of the participating cooperatives enables them to continue their social missions by creating employment opportunities and supporting various social initiatives [94]. The participants further emphasized that a cooperative cannot be sustained solely through social objectives and that commercial success and innovation are indispensable for its long-term sustainability.

“…Only when we achieve economic sustainability can we contribute to social sustainability. …The income we generate economically is transformed into social contributions such as scholarship support, employment opportunities for young people, and opportunities for other women to develop themselves. Therefore, for us, the most important dimension of sustainability is economic sustainability.”

(C3)

“At the moment, it is fifty-fifty. Because if you focus only on social objectives, you become a non-governmental organization. However, we operate under the Ministry of Trade. […] It is clearly commercial because women also expect to earn an income from you. But if the cooperative stops generating revenue after a certain point, it simply cannot continue.”

(C7)

The findings obtained from the qualitative analysis are categorized into environmental, economic, and social dimensions and are summarized in

Table 3. Themes, Codes, and Cooperatives.

Themes	Codes	Cooperatives
Environmental Sustainability Practices	Zero Waste, Upcycling, and Circular Economy Practices	C1, C4, C5, C6, C7
	Environmentally Friendly Agricultural Practices	C2, C3, C4, C7
	Transition to Green Technology	C2, C4, C5
Environmental Sustainability Challenges	High Technology Costs	C2, C4, C7
	Insufficient Technical Expertise and Infrastructure Challenges	C4, C5
	Unfair Competition and Packaging Costs	C1, C4
	Difficulties in Sourcing Chemical-Free Raw Materials	C4, C6
	Lack of Collaboration with Universities and Public Institutions	C4, C3
Economic Sustainability Practices	Transition from Traditional Home-Based Production to Industrial Standards	C2, C4
	Product Diversification and Value Creation through By-Products	C2, C4, C5, C7
	Consumer-Oriented Production	C4, C5, C6
	B2B Sales and the Limitations of E-Commerce	C4, C6
Economic Sustainability Challenges	Increases in Input Costs	C2, C3
	Logistics and Shipping Expenses	C1, C4
	Insufficient Incentives and Financial Deductions	C2, C4, C6
	Lack of Market Regulation and Price Instability	C1, C4
Social Sustainability Practices	Intergenerational Cultural Transmission	C6, C7
	Contribution to Youth Employment	C4, C1, C3
	Women’s Economic Empowerment	C5, C6, C7
	Women’s Psychosocial Recovery through Education	C1, C4, C5,
	Inter-Cooperative Solidarity	C3, C6
	Allocation of Resources for Social Benefit	C3, C6
	Overcoming Social Prejudice	C4, C5, C7
	Struggle for Individual Identity and Social Visibility	C3, C2

.

4.6.2. Environmental Sustainability Practices and Challenges

Environmental sustainability in cooperatives is grounded in practices such as environmentally friendly production [95], reducing the use of pesticides and fertilizers in agricultural activities, conserving biodiversity [96], preferring products free from genetically modified organisms (GMOs) [97], protecting natural resources [98], ensuring animal welfare, utilizing renewable resources, limiting the use of radiation and synthetic additives in food processing, and adopting organic production models and recyclable packaging [96]. Furthermore, sustainable agricultural practices include cultivating diverse crops to improve soil fertility and reduce the incidence of plant diseases, enriching soil through the use of homemade compost instead of chemical fertilizers, installing efficient irrigation systems to minimize water consumption, and implementing rainwater harvesting systems to collect and store rainwater [35].

• Environmental Sustainability Practices of Women’s Cooperatives

From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, the findings suggest that the participating cooperatives’ zero-waste and circular economy practices generate value not only for the cooperatives themselves but also for their external stakeholders. By reducing operational waste, utilizing resources more efficiently, and promoting environmentally responsible production practices, the participating cooperatives contribute to the protection of the natural environment for local communities and future generations.

According to the interview findings, the environmental sustainability practices reported by the participating cooperative representatives were grouped under three codes: “Zero Waste, Upcycling, and Circular Economy Practices,” “Environmentally Friendly Agricultural Practices,” and “Transition to Green Technology.”

• Zero Waste, Upcycling, and Circular Economy Practices

Integrated waste management systems, balancing production and consumption, and the use of renewable energy sources constitute the foundation of sustainable food production [99]. Sustainable food production also involves utilizing organic waste as fertilizer and transforming it into a resource that benefits the environment [100].

The findings indicate that the participating cooperative representatives make a concerted effort to repurpose by-products and waste generated during the processing of local agricultural products into new value-added products or resources, rather than discarding them. The findings further suggest that the participating cooperatives seek to minimize waste and adopt circular economy principles within their operational processes. The participants also reported that their cooperatives transform production waste into new value-added resources by applying the principles of industrial symbiosis.

“The outer shells and red skins generated during peanut production are converted into feed for cattle. Instead of discarding the tons of pepper seeds remaining from red pepper production, efforts are being made to transform them into protein powder.”

(C4)

“We grate and dry the outer peel of bitter oranges to produce spices and jam, while the fruit pulp is used to make marmalade. The seeds are dried in the greenhouse and turned into seedlings. Our watermelon rind jam is also part of a zero-waste project. We make jam from the watermelon rind, while the outer peel is either used as fertilizer or fed to animals… The outer peels of pomegranates are used as fuel during the winter, and the seeds are processed into pomegranate sour sauce or jam.”

(C5)

“During the artichoke processing stage, we distill the outer leaves of the artichoke to produce value-added by-products, such as artichoke juice and tea, thereby maintaining a zero-waste cycle.”

(C7)

“We operate a zero-waste production system. We turn oranges into jam. Those that are not suitable for packaging are ground into powder… We then use the powder to produce soap… The remaining seeds are given to another cooperative, where they are processed into essential oil, so we do not discard them either… In this way, we also protect the financial aspect of our business because nothing goes to waste. We dry tomato pomace and convert it into soup and bread powder.”

(C1)

“…Instead of being discarded, corn cobs are repurposed into tasselled bags and sold to companies. Charcoal is produced from tea waste, thereby bringing these waste materials back into the economy… A regional culture of recycling has also been adopted, such as installing parquet flooring or doors from old houses in mountain houses. To prevent waste, women were taught how to calculate costs, and leftover fabric pieces were transformed into hair accessories instead of being discarded. Placemats made from waste materials were sold to large companies.”

(C6)

• Environmentally Friendly Agricultural Practices

By adopting environmentally friendly agricultural practices, cooperatives mitigate the adverse environmental impacts of agricultural production. In this context, they produce high value-added products through ecological farming, invest in organic fertilizers instead of chemical fertilizers, reduce production costs, and adopt innovations that improve farm-level productivity [19,60,101].

The interviews reveal that cooperatives make substantial efforts to minimize chemical pesticide use to safeguard soil quality and human health. The findings further suggest that the participating cooperatives seek to serve as role models within their local communities by adopting Good Agricultural Practices and Integrated Controlled Agriculture. The participants also reported that manure from animals owned by the cooperatives is applied to agricultural fields instead of chemical fertilizers and that traditional methods, such as the use of wood ash, are employed for pest control.

“The preservation and dissemination of heirloom seeds (e.g., Karakılcık wheat, Sakız artichokes, and local endemic herbs).”

(C4; C3; C7)

“All cooperative members strive to serve as role models in the region by implementing Good Agricultural Practices and Integrated Controlled Agriculture. The analyses we conducted revealed that we had destroyed almost all living organisms through the excessive use of chemicals. Therefore, based on the results of these soil analyses, we began enriching the soil by restoring its essential nutrients.”

(C4)

“Animal manure and vermicompost are used instead of chemical fertilizers.”

(C4; C3)

“Traditional and biological methods, such as wood ash and combinations of different plants, are used to control pests.”

(C4; C2; C7)

“To protect the natural flora, we are trying to establish an awareness of sustainable harvesting by ensuring that endemic plants are collected without uprooting them.”

(C3)

From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, the interview findings suggest that these environmentally friendly agricultural practices create value not only for the participating cooperatives but also for consumers, local communities, and environmental stakeholders. The findings further suggest that the use of chemical-free production methods and heirloom seeds contributes to food safety, consumer health, and the preservation of local ecosystems.

• Transition to Green Technology

Resource management, which involves conserving natural resources and ensuring their preservation for future generations, is one of the fundamental components of sustainability [100]. The participating cooperative representatives reported that, to the extent permitted by their available resources, their cooperatives invest in sustainable technological infrastructure that promotes energy and water conservation, supports the efficient use of limited natural resources, and facilitates the transition to clean energy sources. The findings further suggest that the participating cooperatives seek to avoid the use of plastic in their operations, reuse packaging materials to reduce paper waste, and invest in projects that decrease water and energy consumption throughout the production process. The participants also reported that a substantial proportion of the electricity required for production is generated through renewable energy sources, particularly solar panels.

“Whenever possible, we reuse the boxes delivered by supermarkets by turning them inside out. We do not purchase new boxes in order to prevent paper waste… For example, even our vinegars are produced in glass jars or stainless-steel tanks. By using ozone washing technology, we may contribute to that the products are cleaned more effectively while using less water. In this way, we reduce both water consumption and the waste of resources associated with manual washing.”

(C2)

“Instead of relying on conventional electricity, we have started switching to solar panels. We also use not only drip irrigation but vertical drip irrigation, which waters only the roots of the plants… As a result, we use less water and prevent waste.”

(C4)

“Solar energy has now been installed in our cooperative through the financial support we received from KOOP-DES… (Turkish Ministry of Trade, Cooperative Support Program)”

(C5)

From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, the interview findings suggest that the environmental sustainability practices adopted by the participating cooperatives create value not only for the cooperatives themselves but also for consumers, local communities, public institutions, and future generations. By addressing the environmental expectations of diverse stakeholder groups, these practices also contribute to strengthening the participating cooperatives’ social and environmental responsibilities.

• Environmental Sustainability Challenges in Women’s Cooperatives

The participating cooperative representatives reported that their cooperatives encounter various financial, technological, and market-related challenges in implementing environmental sustainability practices. The findings further suggest that limited access to financial resources, low levels of innovation, small operational scales, fragmented production structures, and the high costs associated with investments in modern processing technologies and quality control systems constrain the participating cooperatives’ environmental sustainability efforts and slow the adoption of new technologies [23].

According to the interview findings, the environmental sustainability challenges reported by the participating cooperative representatives were grouped under five codes: “High Technology Costs,” “Insufficient Technical Expertise and Infrastructure Challenges,” “Unfair Competition and Packaging Costs,” “Difficulties in Sourcing Chemical-Free Raw Materials,” and “Lack of Collaboration with Universities and Other Institutions.”

• High Technology Costs

The high-quality machinery and equipment required to maintain green production standards place a significant financial burden on cooperatives, as these technologies are largely import-dependent and therefore highly sensitive to exchange rate fluctuations [102]. According to the interview findings, the participating cooperative representatives reported that the initial investment costs of green technologies, such as solar panels, smart irrigation systems, and specialized drying equipment (e.g., freeze dryers), are perceived as prohibitively high and exceed the financial capacity of the participating cooperatives.

“We simply do not have enough money to invest in solar energy… Freeze-drying is the healthiest method, but it is also extremely expensive.”

(C7)

“Large cisterns and storage tanks are needed to collect rainwater… However, constructing these cisterns involves costs that are far beyond our financial capacity.”

(C2)

“Industrial machinery is imported from abroad; therefore, the cost of machinery is very high.”

(C4)

• Insufficient Technical Expertise and Infrastructure Challenges

One of the major challenges faced by women’s cooperatives in modernizing their production infrastructure and adapting to the green transition is the lack of technical expertise, which has been described as “technological adaptation and capacity mismatch” [103]. According to the interview findings, the participating cooperative representatives reported that their cooperatives experience difficulties in operating energy-efficient and eco-friendly imported or newly developed machinery due to limited technical expertise, as well as in finding qualified personnel for its installation and maintenance. The findings further indicate that, due to the lack of adequate laboratory infrastructure in their regions to verify that products are chemical-free and safe, the participating cooperatives must conduct laboratory analyses in other cities, resulting in substantial testing costs.

“At the beginning, we needed specialists to operate these machines because we did not know how to use them… We contacted the manufacturers… but even they did not know… Our boiling unit remained unused for nearly three months.”

(C5)

The interview findings also indicate that domestically produced imitation machinery available on the market often operates inefficiently and eventually falls into disuse, resulting in what the participants described as “machine graveyards.”

“In our country, machines are produced using a copy-and-paste approach. The testing processes are unsuccessful. As you may have heard, much of the machinery and equipment purchased by women’s cooperatives eventually turns into a machine graveyard.”

(C4)

• Unfair Competition and Packaging Costs

According to the interview findings, the cooperative representatives reported that their cooperatives strive to comply with high food safety and quality standards, including appropriate packaging and product traceability. However, the findings indicate that the participating cooperatives face major challenges arising from high supply chain costs and inadequate logistics infrastructure [104].

The findings further suggest that the participating cooperatives compete in the same market as informal producers whose products are manufactured under unhygienic conditions or through the use of chemical inputs. Consequently, the participating cooperatives, which use environmentally friendly but more costly packaging materials such as glass, are perceived to be at a competitive disadvantage. Furthermore, the interview findings indicate that packaging materials complying with food safety standards (e.g., bottles, bags, and boxes) are not readily available locally and therefore must be procured from other regions, substantially increasing transportation costs.

“When you enter the market, you find an incredibly unregulated environment… Our neighbour produces the same tomato paste, but they use hot filling. The jars are filled without being sterilized by boiling… While you obtain 100 jars from 10 kg of product, they are able to produce 15 more jars from the same quantity. That is the difference between us.”

(C1)

“We have major shortcomings in packaging… There is no manufacturer of corrugated cardboard packaging in our region. The nearest one is in Gaziantep, and the transportation cost of the cardboard is extremely high.”

(C4)

• Difficulties in Sourcing Chemical-Free Raw Materials

According to the interview findings, the cooperative representatives reported that their cooperatives’ marketing strategies are centered on producing natural, healthy, and additive-free products. However, the findings also suggest that fulfilling this commitment is accompanied by significant challenges in sourcing chemical-free raw materials [105]. The participants further emphasized that the widespread use of hormones and chemical inputs to increase agricultural productivity has made it increasingly difficult to obtain natural and pesticide-free raw materials, such as thyme and mint.

“It is almost impossible to obtain pesticide-free dried mint, rosemary, thyme, and many other herbs… We have struggled tremendously to achieve hormone-free and chemical-free production.”

(C4)

“We are deeply committed to producing natural, chemical-free products. However, finding local farmers who cultivate without synthetic fertilizers or pesticides is incredibly challenging. Even when we do locate such suppliers, their yields are lower and their prices are significantly higher. This scarcity makes it very difficult to maintain continuous production without dramatically increasing our own retail prices”

(C6)

• Lack of Collaboration with Universities and Public Institutions

From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, the interview findings suggest that limited collaboration with strategic external stakeholders—particularly universities, local governments, and technology providers—restricts the participating cooperatives’ access to the knowledge, technical expertise, and infrastructural support required for their green transition.

According to the interview findings, representatives of the cooperatives reported that one of the underlying causes of the structural challenges faced by their cooperatives is the limited collaboration with universities and other external institutions [68]. The findings further suggest that the participating cooperatives have been unable to obtain the practical, field-oriented consultancy and research and development (R&D) support they expect from universities in areas such as green agricultural practices, soil analysis, and food technologies.

“We submitted a request to the university, but it was not met. If universities worked alongside us in the field on these issues… and if the mistakes we make were analysed, we would be able to acquire more accurate knowledge.”

(C4)

“As we try to develop eco-friendly packaging or naturally extend the shelf-life of our organic products, we desperately need scientific guidance. Although we are located close to a university, there is no established channel to collaborate with their agriculture or food engineering faculties. The academic knowledge stays on the campus, and we miss out on vital R&D support that could elevate our production standards.”

(C3)

4.6.3. Economic Sustainability and Challenges

Women’s cooperatives function not only as organizations that promote social solidarity and women’s empowerment but also as commercial enterprises that must ensure their long-term financial viability. Economic sustainability is therefore essential for maintaining both their business operations and their social missions. However, previous studies have shown that women’s cooperatives often encounter significant financial constraints, including limited access to capital, rising production costs, inadequate working capital, and restricted market opportunities, all of which threaten their organizational sustainability [106].

• Economic Sustainability Practices of Women’s Cooperatives

From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, the interview findings suggest that the participating cooperatives generate economic value not only for their members but also for local producers, suppliers, institutional customers, and local economies. By creating employment opportunities, supporting women’s participation in economic life, and strengthening local value chains, the participating cooperatives contribute to the economic well-being of multiple stakeholder groups. These findings align with previous studies demonstrating that women’s cooperatives contribute to women’s economic empowerment by facilitating access to paid employment, formal labor markets, capital, finance, and markets [26].

According to the interview findings, the economic sustainability practices reported by the participating cooperative representatives were grouped under four codes: “Transition from Traditional Home-Based Production to Industrial Standards,” “Product Diversification and Value Creation through By-Products,” “Consumer-Oriented Production,” and “B2B Sales and the Limitations of E-Commerce.”

• Transition from Traditional Home-Based Production to Industrial Standards

For women’s cooperatives, moving beyond home-based production and establishing formal production facilities is not merely a strategic decision but also a legal requirement for accessing national markets, including B2B markets, retail chains, and e-commerce platforms [107]. The findings indicate that these cooperatives moved from home-based setups to legally compliant facilities with standardized and inspectable hygienic conditions. The findings further suggest that this transition represents a fundamental step toward the professionalization of the participating cooperatives.

“…It is not possible to maintain consistent standards in home-based production. Women produce wonderful products in their homes, but they cannot may contribute to the required hygiene standards. They are also unfamiliar with regulated production practices… What we have actually done is combine traditional production with training, replacing home-based production with standardized production recipes carried out through a system that complies with regulations and can be inspected by public authorities.”

(C4)

“We have a production facility that strictly complies with the relevant legislation, including hygiene regulations and disinfection requirements.”

(C2)

• Product Diversification and Value Creation through By-Products

The representatives reported that their cooperatives diversify their product portfolios to enhance economic sustainability and increase the added value of raw materials through processing methods such as drying and canning. The findings further suggest that the participating cooperatives have developed new income-generating opportunities by transforming materials that were traditionally discarded (e.g., the outer leaves of artichokes) into value-added products. In this way, these cooperatives adopt zero-waste principles by converting production residues, such as pulp, peels, and textile waste, into by-products, thereby contributing to their financial sustainability [108].

Furthermore, the representatives view product diversification as a crucial strategy for maximizing income from limited raw materials. Accordingly, these cooperatives create economic value through innovation by transforming traditionally discarded by-products into marketable products and promoting local products, thereby contributing to the economic, social, and cultural development of their local communities [109].

“From peanuts, a local raw material that has traditionally been sold with a low profit margin, we have developed 77 different high value-added and geographically indicated products, including peanut halva, gluten-free flours, and peanut butter. The “Otak” brand has been officially registered, and during the first five years of the cooperative, it was decided not to distribute profits among members; instead, all revenues were reinvested in expanding the brand and mechanizing production through investments in production lines.”

(C4)

“From bitter oranges alone, we produce bitter orange peel jam, bitter orange sour sauce, and seedlings. We grate and dry the outer peel to use it as a spice. We process the pulp and juice into sour sauce… and we separate, dry, and germinate the remaining seeds in our greenhouse to produce seedlings.”

(C5)

“We dry artichoke leaves and produce artichoke noodles… During the olive pruning season, we produce olive leaf vinegar… We also make mandarin tahini halva.”

(C2)

“…We teach different ways of processing artichokes. If you dry them, you can create much greater added value. You can also preserve them by canning.”

(C7)

• Consumer-Oriented Production

Traditional cooperatives that fail to adapt to changing consumer trends and innovation and that do not conduct adequate market research are more likely to be unsuccessful [110].

The findings indicate that the cooperatives have shifted from a traditional ‘produce first, sell later’ approach to a demand-driven strategy based on local sourcing. The findings further suggest that the participating cooperatives prioritize geographically indicated products and locally sourced raw materials in order to minimize supply costs, create economic value by utilizing local resources, and gain a competitive advantage by transforming local cultural heritage into value-added products.

“Producing something that has no market demand does not seem logical to me. Moreover, bringing in yarn or natural fibres from elsewhere, weaving them here, and then transporting the finished products back to other regions is also very costly from a logistics perspective. That is why we focus on geographically indicated peanuts…”

(C4)

“…cloth is a very important fabric; it is known as hemp weaving.”

(C6)

“Yufka bread is a product that is consumed daily and receives daily orders, making it a widely producible product in our region. We allocate a large portion of our budget to this product, while reserving the remaining resources for products that sell more slowly but whose value and market potential are well established.”

(C5)

• B2B Sales and the Limitations of E-Commerce

The representatives highlighted that their cooperatives are expanding their market networks and profit margins beyond local markets using a mix of B2B and business-to-consumer (B2C) channels (e.g., municipalities, hotel chains, wholesalers, e-commerce platforms, and proprietary websites). Furthermore, the results suggest that these cooperatives are increasingly shifting toward B2B sales, thereby establishing long-term supply chain relationships with institutional customers. This transition not only creates more stable market opportunities for the cooperatives, but also enables corporate buyers to support women’s labor and advance their own corporate social responsibility (CSR) objectives. However, the participants emphasized that marketing handmade products through B2C e-commerce platforms often results in substantial economic losses because of limited product standardization, high shipping costs, and high product return rates. Consequently, several participants characterized the B2C e-commerce model as economically unviable for handmade goods.

“…We started selling through online shopping platforms, but a woman makes a basket, the customer does not like it, and it is returned. A basket that normally costs us 30 lira ends up costing us 300 lira because of the return process. Instead of selling women’s products only once at local fairs, we have enabled them to transition to a sustainable and substantial economic model by producing bed linen for hotel chains and children’s clothing for large corporations. Supplying croquet and hazelnuts to major coffee companies is an example of sustainable B2B agreements that combine women’s labour with the private sector. We produce 100,000 ties for a single company.”

(C6)

“We have our own website… Our products are also available on online shopping platforms. We market our products through these channels. Overall, our profit margin is 20%, whereas in retail sales it reaches 40%. We produce the same products, use the same facilities, and consume the same amount of energy, yet we earn 20% less. Therefore, we will continue our efforts to expand our retail sales through digital platforms.”

(C4)

From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, the findings suggest that the participating cooperatives create economic value not only for their members but also for suppliers, institutional customers, local producers, and other economic stakeholders. By establishing long-term B2B partnerships and strengthening local value chains, the participating cooperatives contribute to shared value creation while supporting their own long-term financial sustainability.

• Economic Sustainability Challenges in Women’s Cooperatives

Women’s cooperatives rely primarily on sales revenues, donations, project-based funding, and financial support received from external stakeholders. However, previous studies have shown that women’s cooperatives frequently encounter significant economic challenges, including rising input costs, increasing packaging and logistics expenses, inflation, bureaucratic deductions, unfair competition, and difficulties related to product processing, marketing, storage, transportation, and market knowledge [107]. Economic instability also negatively affects the procurement of raw materials and makes it difficult for cooperatives to determine appropriate product prices [111]. Furthermore, high taxes and administrative fees hinder their long-term financial sustainability [112]. Limited access to national and international support mechanisms may further disadvantage women’s cooperatives, particularly those operating in rural and less-developed regions [113].

According to the interview findings, theses cooperative reported that, despite having production capacity and market potential, their cooperatives experience considerable difficulties in marketing their products profitably because of increasing operational costs, macroeconomic fluctuations, logistics expenses, and shipping costs.

The representatives identified several economic sustainability challenges, which were grouped under four codes: “Increase in Input Costs,” “Logistics and Freight Expenses,” “Insufficient Incentives and Financial Deductions,” and “Lack of Market Regulation and Price Instability.”

• Increases in Input Costs

The representatives highlighted that rising input costs (e.g., fuel and fertilizers), reliance on externally sourced materials, and inflation severely disrupt their financial equilibrium, ultimately threatening the survival of their commercial operations.

“We also face financial difficulties because economic conditions are becoming more challenging every day. The jars that we used to buy for 0.80 Turkish lira now cost 12 Turkish lira. Just imagine—it has increased from 0.80 lira to 12 lira in only six years.”

(C2)

“The prices of the raw agricultural materials we procure from local farmers have increased dramatically. However, it is not just the raw food; the cost of secondary inputs, such as glass jars, lids, and product labels, almost triples within a few months. Since we try to keep our final product prices reasonable for our customers, these rising input costs completely melt away our profit margins”

(C3)

• Logistics and Freight Expenses

Inefficiencies in logistics processes, inadequate storage and processing facilities, and deficiencies in infrastructure limit women’s cooperatives’ ability to produce, store, and distribute their products effectively. As a result, access to profitable markets becomes increasingly difficult [34]. The representatives emphasized that limited direct access to end consumers prevents their cooperatives from gaining full control over their marketing channels. The findings further suggest that, as a result, these cooperatives rely on intermediaries, such as wholesalers, traders, and commission agents, to market their products.

“Producing the product is only one part of the process. Without adequate storage facilities and the capacity to package our products properly, accessing large markets remains only a dream. Since we have limited sales channels that allow us to reach final consumers directly (such as e-commerce or our own retail stores), we are forced to accept the prices offered by intermediaries in order to sell our products before they deteriorate.”

(C4)

“We have a large customer base, but logistics is a major problem. The costs that challenge us the most are particularly the high expenses associated with packaging…”

(C1)

• Insufficient Incentives and Financial Deductions

In addition to internal financial resources—such as members’ capital contributions, membership fees, reserve funds, and retained earnings—cooperatives also benefit from grants and loans provided by national and international institutions to sustain their operations. However, previous studies have indicated that grants provided by governments and international organizations are treated as commercial income under the current tax legislation and are therefore subject to a 25% corporate income tax (or withholding tax), thereby reducing the intended financial benefits of these support mechanisms [44,52].

The participating cooperative representatives reported that financial deductions imposed by public institutions and tax authorities constitute a major challenge to the financial sustainability of their cooperatives. Moreover, the results reveal that taxing grants and financial assistance undermines public support mechanisms, thereby restricting the financial resources essential for the cooperatives’ long-term growth.

“They provide seventy percent of the funding, while we have to cover the remaining amount ourselves, which naturally creates a financial burden… In addition, we are required to pay 25% corporate income tax.”

(C2)

“…The government takes 25% of grants and donations. It is treated as withholding tax or income tax because these funds are regarded as income. We are organizations without capital… The taxation system needs to be revised for women’s cooperatives.”

(C4)

“National support programs are beneficial for small-scale purchases; however, they are insufficient for technological transformation. Moreover, reductions in international funding, such as grants from the European Union due to global crises, place women’s cooperatives under considerable financial pressure.”

(C6)

• Lack of Market Regulation and Price Instability

Pricing based on social value (i.e., emotional considerations) rather than economic rationality and cost accounting makes women’s cooperatives particularly vulnerable when competing with informal market actors whose pricing decisions are driven primarily by cost considerations [114]. The cooperative representatives reported that their cooperatives often experience difficulties in establishing an appropriate balance between production costs and product prices. The findings further suggest that, rather than relying on cost-based calculations, pricing decisions are frequently influenced by considerations such as “handmade production” and “women’s production,” resulting in inconsistent pricing strategies. Consequently, the participating cooperatives experience difficulties competing with informal producers operating in the same market.

“The biggest problem faced by women’s cooperatives is price instability. When I attend fairs and festivals, I see tomato paste being sold for 500 TL. That price simply cannot be justified. Just because it is handmade does not mean it should be priced that way. If it costs 130 TL to produce, you might sell it for 200 TL at most, but you cannot sell it for 500 TL.”

(C4)

“When you enter the market, you encounter an unregulated environment… You produce tomato paste, and your neighbour produces the same product. However, they use hot filling during production, which is extremely dangerous… We produce concentrated tomato paste.”

(C1)

4.6.4. Social Sustainability Practices in Women’s Cooperatives

From the perspective of social sustainability, women’s cooperatives bring women together, enabling them to access educational opportunities and social rights while fostering solidarity and social networks in response to gender-based inequalities, structural disadvantages, and economic challenges. In this way, they support women’s social empowerment by providing an environment in which women can gain experience in collective action [26,79,115,116]. Through democratic and transparent governance, women’s cooperatives also facilitate the intergenerational transmission of traditional knowledge and contribute to challenging gender stereotypes, thereby promoting women’s participation in economic and social life.

Women frequently encounter patriarchal norms and cultural prejudices that reinforce the perception that they cannot succeed in economic life, thereby limiting their access to employment and other opportunities [117]. Within the cooperative environment, however, women are able to express themselves, acquire new skills, participate actively in decision-making processes, and develop supportive social networks [39,81,118]. Previous studies have shown that women’s cooperatives contribute to enhancing women’s self-confidence, strengthening family communication, promoting psychological empowerment, increasing social participation, and supporting greater economic and social independence [26,79,115,119].

From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, the participating cooperatives create social value not only for their members, but also for local communities, families, public institutions, young people, and other stakeholder groups. By strengthening social solidarity, supporting women’s empowerment, preserving cultural heritage, and promoting community development, the cooperatives contribute to shared social value across multiple stakeholder groups.

According to the interview findings, the social sustainability practices reported by the cooperative representatives were grouped under eight codes: “Intergenerational Cultural Transmission,” “Contribution to Youth Employment,” “Women’s Economic Empowerment,” “Inter-Cooperative Solidarity,” “Allocation of Resources for Social Benefit,” “Overcoming Social Prejudice,” “The Struggle for Individual Identity and Social Visibility,” and “Women’s Psychosocial Recovery and Empowerment through Education.”

• Intergenerational Cultural Transmission

From the perspective of social sustainability, cooperatives contribute to the transmission of local production knowledge, traditional practices, and cultural heritage across generations [120]. In particular, women’s cooperatives play an important role in enabling future generations to learn how to produce local products in accordance with traditional quality standards and characteristics, as well as how to reduce waste and protect soil quality through sustainable production practices.

As highlighted by the interviewees, the cooperatives serve as vital platforms where traditional knowledge, production practices, and cultural heritage are preserved, practiced, and transmitted to younger generations via practical experience, collective memory, and oral narratives. The findings further suggest that these practices contribute to preserving intangible cultural heritage by integrating traditional knowledge and region-specific production practices into contemporary economic activities.

“The younger generation… cooked together with women over the age of 55. They had the opportunity to learn dishes that reflected their cultural heritage through gastronomy. In a sense, we are selling culture through both generations and products. By producing region-specific products, we preserve and sustain the rich cultural heritage that has been passed down from the Ottoman period to the present by integrating it into commercial products.”

(C6)

“Intergenerational continuity and sustainability actually mean being able to adapt to today’s conditions. You learned it from your grandparents, you used it, improved it, and then passed it on to your grandchildren.”

(C7)

• Contribution to Youth Employment

Young people’s growing distance from cooperatives and agriculture reflects not only a shortage of labour, but also a broader disconnection from local culture, traditional knowledge, and rural production practices [111]. Increasing young people’s participation in cooperatives may therefore not only help address youth unemployment but also strengthen the long-term continuity, innovation capacity, and sustainability of cooperatives [121].

Within the framework of social sustainability, the participating cooperatives create social value by providing education and employment opportunities not only for their members but also for disadvantaged stakeholder groups, including young people, students, and girls supported through scholarship programs. The interviewees noted that younger generations often view cooperatives as low-status organizations, leading them to seek employment in alternative sectors. The findings further suggest that this generational gap may threaten the long-term continuity and renewal capacity of the participating cooperatives. At the same time, the participants emphasized that engaging young people in areas such as e-commerce, digital marketing, and product packaging contributes both to youth employment and to the long-term sustainability of their cooperatives.

“When we talk to young people about cooperatives, they see them as something old-fashioned. Cooperative work is not part of their career aspirations; they want professions they consider more prestigious. In reality, however, we desperately need the energy of young people, their ability to use social media, and their new ideas. We know the traditional methods, but they are the ones who will carry them into the future. A huge gap has emerged between our generations. If we cannot attract young people to this work, once we grow old, we will have no choice but to close the cooperative. Unfortunately, the future of the cooperative is in the hands of the younger generation.”

(C4)

“By creating local job opportunities, particularly in our e-commerce, packaging, and digital marketing operations, we provide young people with a sustainable income and a reason to stay in our district rather than migrating to larger cities”

(C3)

“We actively employ young women who are either recent graduates or continuing their education. Working here not only provides them with a degree of financial independence but also equips them with practical business and teamwork skills before they fully enter the corporate world.”

(C5)

• Women’s Economic Empowerment

Women’s empowerment refers to women’s ability to access and control economic resources [106]. The relatively low capital contribution required to establish cooperatives enables women to overcome barriers to entrepreneurship. Furthermore, owing to their democratic and egalitarian organizational structure, cooperatives have neither dominant owners nor controlling shareholders, allowing women to create self-employment opportunities based on the value of their own labour. In this way, women’s cooperatives contribute to women’s income generation, economic empowerment, improved living standards, household economic and food security, strengthened livelihoods, and local entrepreneurship [81,122]. Women’s participation in the labour market also contributes to the development of their human and social capital while promoting greater gender equality and well-being [123,124,125].

The interviewees emphasized that their cooperatives play a crucial role in increasing women’s participation in economic and social life through job creation and economic empowerment. The findings further suggest that participation in cooperative activities enables women to acquire vocational skills, obtain professional certificates, establish their own businesses, and become more economically independent.

“…Our goal is to bring women who have withdrawn from economic life back into the economy.”

(C7)

“Our story began with women who had been unable to complete their education because, in this region, women are generally expected to be housewives.”

(C6)

“At the very least, our aim is to create women in rural areas who are equal within the household, have a voice in family decisions, can put money in their own pockets, and are able to meet their own needs… Since we live in a rural area, most of these women had never previously worked in any formal institution or official job, nor had they even worked as daily wage laborers. According to their skills, we enabled them to obtain certificates from Public Education Centres, the relevant ministries, or free certification programs offered by independent organizations, and then integrated them into our production model. As a result, many women have established their own sewing workshops and opened their own businesses.”

(C5)

• Women’s Psychosocial Recovery and Empowerment through Education

Women’s cooperatives serve as important platforms that foster women’s self-confidence and psychosocial empowerment by providing secure social networks for their members [81]. The participating cooperative representatives reported that their cooperatives function as supportive spaces that promote the psychosocial recovery and educational development of disadvantaged or traumatized women while strengthening their social capacities. The findings further suggest that the participating cooperatives provided psychosocial support during periods of crisis, such as earthquakes, thereby helping women rebuild social connections and regain emotional well-being.

“Among us are women who have divorced and are struggling to raise their children alone. There are women who have experienced severe psychological distress. Some of our members had not left their rooms for three years and had become isolated because of psychological trauma. These women need support. We came together to build social awareness and create a sense of community. To overcome these forms of social collapse, you have to go into the field and work directly with people.”

(C4)

“After the earthquake, the cooperative helped women remain strong both financially and emotionally because it truly became our place of healing. That is incredibly valuable… You will see happy women here.”

(C1)

“…Our primary reason for establishing the cooperative was social interaction because, after the earthquake, we were emotionally devastated and psychologically exhausted. Our initial goal was simply to bring women together and spend time with one another… We visited neighbourhoods one by one, joining women during their regular social gatherings, where they came together for tea, and we introduced ourselves and our cooperative.”

(C5)

The interviewees also noted that their cooperatives contribute to the development of women’s capabilities by providing seminars, vocational training, and educational opportunities in areas such as agricultural production, entrepreneurship, commerce, and professional skills. The findings further suggest that supporting women in obtaining professional certificates strengthens their qualifications, facilitates self-employment opportunities, and contributes to their long-term economic empowerment [100].

“When we first established the cooperative, some of our members had not even completed primary school. With the support of the Public Education Centre, we helped them complete both primary and secondary school through external education programs. Over the following three years, some of them also completed high school externally. For us, this became a remarkable example of progressing together not only in production but also in education.”

(C4)

• Inter-Cooperative Solidarity

The primary objective of women’s cooperatives is to achieve economic and social benefits through mutual assistance and solidarity in material, social, and organizational matters [126]. Particularly from the perspective of feminist social work, women living in rural areas establish social support networks through women’s cooperatives by fostering solidarity with one another [100]. The interviewees highlighted that their cooperatives maintain strong collaborative relationships with other women’s cooperatives by sharing knowledge, experience, products, and technical support. The findings further suggest that this inter-cooperative solidarity strengthens institutional cooperation and contributes to the long-term sustainability of women’s cooperatives.

“We prepare small tasting baskets containing samples of all our products… When I need chickpeas, I simply call another women’s cooperative and ask, ‘Could you send me some chickpeas?’… We can also request products such as aprons and hats with our logo from another producers’ cooperative, and they prepare and send them immediately. This strengthens solidarity among cooperatives.”

(C3)

“We have provided voluntary mentoring… We prepare project proposals for different cooperatives, and we do all of this voluntarily. We do not ask for any payment because we wanted to share our knowledge as a form of giving back.”

(C6)

From a Stakeholder Theory perspective, the findings suggest that these cooperatives perceive other women’s cooperatives and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) not as competitors but as strategic partner stakeholders within a horizontal network of collaboration and solidarity. The findings further suggest that the sharing of knowledge, experience, technical expertise, and resources contributes to collective value creation while strengthening social capital among these stakeholders.

• Allocation of Resources for Social Benefit

In cooperatives, profits are distributed only to a limited extent, with priority being given to the achievement of social objectives [127]. Accordingly, cooperatives often reinvest a portion of their financial resources in activities that generate social value and contribute to community well-being. Such initiatives include providing educational scholarships, supporting disadvantaged groups, and creating broader social benefits beyond their membership. The interviewees emphasized that their cooperatives are perceived not merely as organizations pursuing economic profit, but also as social enterprises that allocate part of their income to activities generating social benefit. The findings further suggest that these practices strengthen the social mission of the participating cooperatives while creating value for broader stakeholder groups.

“…As part of our social enterprise activities, we allocate a portion of the income generated from our products to provide scholarships for female students.”

(C3)

“Unlike traditional corporate businesses, our primary goal isn’t just to increase individual dividends. Whenever we generate a financial surplus at the end of the year, our general assembly often votes to allocate a significant portion of these funds to provide educational scholarships for the children of our members or to support women in our district facing sudden financial hardships”

(C6)

From the perspective of Stakeholder Theory, the interview findings suggest that the participating cooperatives extend the benefits they create beyond their members by reinvesting financial resources in educational and social initiatives. In doing so, they generate shared social value for students, disadvantaged women, local communities, and other stakeholder groups.

• Overcoming Social Prejudice

Women’s cooperatives support women’s efforts to overcome patriarchal constraints, establish themselves as independent individuals in economic and social life, gain a voice within the household, and achieve greater social visibility [128]. The establishment of economic enterprises by women through collective action has required them to confront traditional prejudices and patriarchal norms embedded within their local communities [129].

The interviewees noted that women initially encountered sceptical attitudes from local communities toward their participation in cooperatives and commercial activities. The findings further suggest that these perceptions became increasingly positive as women achieved visible economic success and demonstrated their entrepreneurial capabilities. The findings also indicate that participation in cooperative activities contributed to greater recognition of women’s economic roles and, in some cases, increased support from men in household responsibilities.

“Our goal is to create women in rural areas who have a voice within their households, who can at least put money in their own pockets, and who are able to meet their own needs. Because we are women, we have often encountered people who claim that we know nothing about business… They ask us, ‘Isn’t your husband enough for you? Why do you need to work?’”

(C5)

“Girls should say, ‘I want to study, earn my own income, stand on my own feet… and achieve economic independence.’ Women should have economic freedom.”

(C4)

“People said, ‘What could three women possibly accomplish together? What do they know?’”

(C7)

From a Stakeholder Theory perspective, the findings suggest that these cooperatives contribute to transforming community perceptions of women’s economic and social roles. By challenging gender stereotypes and strengthening women’s visibility in economic life, the participating cooperatives create social value for women, families, and local communities.

• Struggle for Individual Identity and Social Visibility

The findings indicate that these cooperatives described their cooperatives as important mechanisms facilitating women’s integration into both economic and social life. The findings further suggest that, by enabling women to participate more actively in decisions affecting their own lives, the participating cooperatives contribute to strengthening women’s social status, personal identity, and self-confidence [100,130].

The participants emphasized that, particularly within strongly traditional and tribal social structures, women are often identified not as independent individuals but through their relationships with male family members—as someone’s wife, daughter, or daughter-in-law. The findings indicate that these cooperatives seek to challenge this perception of a “dependent identity” by encouraging women’s active participation in economic and social life, thereby contributing to changes in traditional gender roles. The findings further suggest that increased economic participation may support broader sociocultural change within local communities.

“We live in a tribal region where you are known less by your own name than as someone’s wife, someone’s daughter, or someone’s daughter-in-law… We have struggled against this mentality… We explain that who you are married to is not what truly matters… We were never seated at the front tables during meetings… But after we established the cooperative, things changed. Now, whenever a meeting is organized, women’s cooperatives and women entrepreneurs are among the first to be invited.”

(C3)

“When women first join us, they often define themselves merely by their family roles—as someone’s wife or mother. However, as they start producing, earning their own income, and making collective decisions, their self-confidence fundamentally shifts. They begin to see themselves as capable individuals. We have witnessed many cases where husbands who initially opposed their wives working outside the home eventually started respecting their opinions on household finances.”

(C2)

From a Stakeholder Theory perspective, the findings suggest that these cooperatives contribute to transforming traditional perceptions of women’s social and economic roles among local stakeholder groups, including families, tribal communities, and local authorities. By strengthening women’s individual identity, visibility, and participation in decision-making, the participating cooperatives create broader social value and contribute to advancing gender equality within their local communities.

5. Theoretical Contributions

According to Stakeholder Theory, cooperatives are established not only to create value and generate profits for their members but also to create value for a wide range of stakeholders, including suppliers, customers, local communities, and the environment. The findings of this study suggest that these cooperatives promote democratic participation in decision-making processes while providing fair remuneration, vocational training, and capacity-building opportunities for women. By fostering economic sustainability, they also contribute to women’s social and economic empowerment. According to the interview findings, increased opportunities for women to generate income through the participating cooperatives may contribute to healthier household consumption, improved educational opportunities for children, regional poverty reduction, and more equitable gender roles. Taken together, the participating cooperatives can serve as catalysts for social sustainability within their local communities.

The findings further indicate that these cooperatives generally procure their raw materials from regional producers, thereby strengthening local supply chains. The findings also suggest that institutional buyers operating in B2B markets increasingly collaborate with the participating cooperatives to support their own sustainability objectives. Consequently, the participating cooperatives strengthen their long-term viability by offering suppliers and institutional customers an ethical and sustainable value chain.

The findings further suggest that these cooperatives create value for environmental stakeholders by adopting circular economy principles, whereby production waste is reused as an input for other production processes (industrial symbiosis) and local natural resources are utilized more efficiently. Furthermore, when municipalities or regional development agencies allocate production facilities or provide financial grants to the participating cooperatives, a reciprocal value exchange is established. While these public institutions pursue their regional sustainability objectives, the participating cooperatives gain access to the financial and intellectual capital necessary for their development. Through this reciprocal stakeholder relationship, the findings suggest that the participating cooperatives contribute to a sustainability cycle by protecting the environment, empowering their members, revitalizing local economies, and providing ethically produced goods to institutional customers.

This study extends the application of Stakeholder Theory by employing it not merely as a conceptual framework, but also as an analytical perspective for interpreting how the environmental, economic, and social sustainability practices of the participating women’s cooperatives create value for different stakeholder groups. Accordingly, the findings were interpreted in relation to key stakeholders, including cooperative members, employees, local producers, consumers, public institutions, local governments, and local communities. In doing so, this study demonstrates that, while the Triple Bottom Line framework provides a comprehensive structure for understanding the environmental, economic, and social dimensions of sustainability, Stakeholder Theory offers additional explanatory power by illustrating how these sustainability practices generate value for different stakeholder groups.

Table 4. A Stakeholder Perspective on Value Creation and Power Asymmetries in Women’s Cooperatives.

Sustainability Dimensions	Interacting Stakeholders	Shared Value Created for Stakeholders	Primary Stakeholder Challenges Encountered	Power Asymmetries and Areas of Conflict
Environmental Sustainability	Consumers, Local communities, Future generations, Silent Stakeholder (Nature)	Provision of healthy and food-secure products, Conservation of natural resources (zero waste), Transmission of cultural heritage.	Weak collaboration with universities and institutions, Dependence on green technology suppliers.	Technological and Informational Asymmetry: Cooperatives’ reliance on external institutions for advanced green technology and expertise (R&D). Unfair competition conflicts with informal and non-standard businesses.
Economic Sustainability	Internal Stakeholders (Members), B2B, Suppliers, The State, Intermediaries	Steady income, Employment security, Socially responsible supply chain value for corporate buyers.	Market conflicts with intermediaries, Taxation policies of public institutions.	Regulatory and Market Power Asymmetry: Tax pressures imposed by the state despite incentives (hegemonic regulatory power). Intermediaries/wholesalers dictating prices due to logistical shortcomings (market power asymmetry).
Social Sustainability	Youth, Girls, Other Cooperatives, Local Authorities, Traditional Tribal Structures, Intra-familial Actors	Educational support, Psychosocial rehabilitation, Knowledge transfer, Attainment of social status for women.	Prejudices of traditional community stakeholders, disinterest of younger generations in the sector.	Sociocultural Power Asymmetry: Traditional resistance and status conflicts exhibited by intra-familial and tribal authority figures against women gaining economic autonomy through cooperatives.

provides a comprehensive synthesis of the qualitative findings by intersecting the three dimensions of sustainability with a Stakeholder Theory perspective. It systematically outlines the key stakeholder groups interacting with the women’s cooperatives, the shared value generated for these groups, and the primary challenges encountered. Furthermore, the table highlights the inherent power asymmetries—spanning technological, regulatory, and sociocultural dimensions—that these cooperatives must navigate to sustain their activities.

6. Conclusions and Discussion

Within the examined women’s cooperatives, the concept of sustainability appears to have evolved beyond a mere academic term. It has become embedded in everyday practice through an intergenerational cultural transmission, often described as “passing on what was learned from one’s mother to one’s child.” In this context, these cooperatives function not only as organizations that generate economic value, but also as valuable actors in promoting environmental and social sustainability.

From the perspective of environmental sustainability, while the qualitative findings do not provide absolute quantitative metrics on waste or emission reductions, the interviews reveal a strong organizational intention to minimize environmental impact. As emphasized by the interviewees, the cooperatives strive to apply circular economy principles within their own operational scale, particularly through upcycling and localized waste management. This finding aligns with the broader literature, suggesting that small-scale and community-based enterprises often inherently exhibit circular tendencies, even if they lack the technological infrastructure for a fully closed-loop system [131,132]. The findings further suggest that these cooperatives incorporate several practical initiatives—such as transforming corn cobs into bags, peanut shells into animal feed, and bitter orange seeds into seedlings—that reflect these principles of the circular economy. Furthermore, they convert production waste into value-added products, such as protein powder, soap, charcoal, vinegar, and bags, thereby creating economic value from materials that would otherwise be discarded. As emphasized by Ibourk and Hninou [34], these environmentally sustainable practices diversify income streams, enhance the competitiveness of cooperatives, and strengthen their long-term resilience.

The findings indicate that these cooperatives adopt a clear position against industrial and chemical-intensive agricultural practices. Their initiatives—including requiring farmers to supply tested and pesticide-free products, replacing chemical pesticides with traditional pest-repellent plants, and preserving heirloom seeds—demonstrate the establishment of radical yet protective principles for building a sustainable ecosystem, consistent with the arguments advanced by Sachs et al. [133]. In addition, they are actively striving to reduce their carbon footprint by adopting technologies and systems that promote water and energy conservation.

The findings suggest that the participating women’s cooperatives are increasingly evolving into professional commercial actors. Participants reported conducting market research, developing products through research and development (R&D), transforming waste into economic value, and aligning their production standards with governmental regulations, thereby operating in a manner comparable to corporate enterprises. By drawing upon women’s indigenous ecological knowledge and experience, cooperatives increase production and utilize local resources as raw materials, thereby creating sustainable livelihoods [134]. In this respect, the participating cooperatives can function not only as employment models, but also as green business models that aim to generate innovative, nature-based, and locally grounded solutions to global challenges such as climate change, food security, and food waste. As identified in this study, economic sustainability is not merely about generating income; rather, it constitutes the fundamental prerequisite for creating social value (e.g., scholarships and employment opportunities) and environmental value (e.g., green transformation) [45,135].

The participants’ statements indicate that accessing adequate financial resources remains a primary challenge for the examined women’s cooperatives [26,136,137]. As noted by Aldırmaz Akkaya [24], women’s cooperatives primarily struggle with high taxes and administrative fees, rising production costs, and liquidity and cash-flow shortages. Consistent with these observations, the majority of the participating cooperatives were established with minimal initial capital or limited bank loans, and they heavily rely on grant programs to sustain their operations. However, the 25% tax deduction imposed on these grants, together with the classification of cooperatives as commercial enterprises subject to corporate taxation, places a substantial financial burden on them. As emphasized in the literature [44,52], this situation significantly undermines their commercial and economic viability. From an economic perspective, rising input costs [24,26], coupled with substantial increases in logistics and packaging expenses, have reportedly resulted in customer losses. As a coping mechanism, zero-waste and recycling practices are adopted not only to protect the environment but also as an economic necessity to mitigate financial risks and reduce raw material costs. Furthermore, as reported by Kızılaslan and Gönültaş [138], e-commerce platforms may become economically inefficient for cooperatives due to the high costs associated with product returns and shipping. Furthermore, to support economic sustainability, policy measures could offer subsidies for social security premiums, a critical need particularly highlighted by the participating women’s cooperatives.

The findings of this study indicate that inadequate market regulatory mechanisms place cooperatives that produce high-quality but relatively costly products at a competitive disadvantage against producers offering cheaper, non-standardized products. This form of unfair competition suppresses market prices, narrows the profit margins of women’s cooperatives, and makes effective price-setting increasingly difficult. This finding is consistent with the existing literature [111].

From the perspective of social sustainability, within the context of this study, participants perceive women’s cooperatives as a highly valuable localized mechanism that has the potential to contribute to poverty alleviation and foster psychosocial empowerment among members. Although this exploratory research relies on the self-reported assessments of cooperative representatives and does not directly measure long-term changes in income levels, the managers’ observations strongly resonate with established developmental frameworks. Extensive external literature consistently identifies cooperatives as critical drivers of socio-economic empowerment, noting their capacity to disrupt patriarchal market structures and reduce poverty at the grassroots level by integrating marginalized groups into the formal economy [81,82]. In alignment with this, the findings suggest that the examined women’s cooperatives contribute to poverty reduction by creating income-generating opportunities for women and supporting local economic development [139,140]. Beyond enhancing women’s social recognition and reducing their economic dependence within the household, these cooperatives appear to serve as valuable platforms for empowering women socially and economically, and for promoting gender equality through a variety of support programs. The psychological support provided to women through such initiatives [126] and the broader social benefits identified in this study are consistent with previous research [2,109,141].

Taken together, despite ongoing financial sustainability challenges, this study indicates that the participating cooperatives can act as key enablers for empowerment, contributing to multifaceted improvements in women’s lives.

As a result, this study reveals that from a management perspective, women’s cooperatives serve as a strategic empowerment tool, and according to the interviewed managers, cooperative activities may contribute to improvements in several aspects of women’s lives, despite ongoing challenges with financial sustainability. According to the findings, sustainability practices within these production and business cooperatives extend beyond merely generating environmental, economic, and social outputs; they actively create shared value for diverse stakeholder groups. Specifically, while environmental initiatives benefit consumers and local communities, economic practices bolster the financial viability of partners and local producers. Furthermore, social practices foster female empowerment, social solidarity, and regional development. By demonstrating how the dimensions of the Triple Bottom Line create value for various actors, this research establishes Stakeholder Theory as a vital, complementary framework for interpreting sustainability in women’s cooperatives.

7. Managerial Implications

In light of this study’s findings, this study proposes both operational measures for cooperatives and broader policy directions to ensure the long-term sustainability of women’s cooperatives. At the micro-level, based on direct statements from the participants, several practical short-term steps for cooperatives and local stakeholders can be implemented. First, given the high return and shipping costs associated with e-commerce, cooperatives are advised to prioritize sustainable B2B wholesale contracts with institutional buyers, such as hotels, restaurants, and municipalities, over the B2C model. Furthermore, to combat high packaging costs for materials like bottles and cardboard, establishing regional joint purchasing and supply networks among cooperatives may help reduce packaging costs. Additionally, offering cost analysis and rational pricing training to cooperative members is a crucial step in preventing unfair competition. Finally, young people’s lack of interest in the cooperative movement can be mitigated by creating youth-oriented departments focused on e-commerce and social media management, alongside encouraging university students to complete their internship projects within these cooperatives.

At the macro-level, deficiencies in technological infrastructure, financial difficulties, and psychosocial support needs identified during the interviews suggest that broader structural reforms may be beneficial. Consequently, several possible policy directions may be considered by policymakers, state institutions, and local governments. To strengthen technical and infrastructural support, publicly funded regional food laboratories could be established to conduct chemical-free production testing, while mobile technical support teams could be established by relevant public institutions and governmental support agencies to provide timely assistance in the event of machinery breakdowns. Regarding financial and tax reforms, it may be beneficial to reconsider the classification of capacity-building grants provided to women’s cooperatives so that they are no longer treated as commercial income. Moreover, specialized green technology grants could be developed to support investments in modern equipment such as freeze dryers and solar energy technologies. Finally, publicly supported psychological counseling services for female cooperative members in trauma- or earthquake-affected regions may represent a valuable social policy direction.

8. Limitations and Future Research Directions

This study is subject to several limitations. First, as this study employed a qualitative research design, the findings are not intended to be statistically generalizable. Given that the primary aim of this research was to develop an in-depth understanding of the sustainability practices of women’s cooperatives, the findings should be interpreted within the specific context in which this study was conducted.

A further limitation concerns the composition of the sample, which consisted of women’s cooperatives that were actively engaged in implementing sustainability practices. Accordingly, the sample was not intended to represent the entire population of women’s cooperatives but rather to comprise information-rich cases capable of providing detailed insights into sustainability practices. The findings therefore primarily reflect the experiences of cooperatives that are actively engaged in environmental, economic, and social sustainability practices.

Another limitation is that the empirical data were derived exclusively from interviews with a single managerial representative from each women’s production and business cooperative. Consequently, the findings reflect the assessments of decision-makers rather than the individual experiences of ordinary members, employees, or other local stakeholders. Furthermore, the possibility that managers may present a more favorable view of their own cooperatives’ operations and sustainability practices should be considered. Future research could incorporate these diverse stakeholder perspectives alongside those of management to provide a more comprehensive understanding.

Future research could broaden the scope of inquiry by including women’s cooperatives that have not yet implemented sustainability practices or that have adopted such practices only to a limited extent. This would enable comparative analyses across cooperatives with different levels of engagement in sustainability and provide a more comprehensive understanding of differing organizational experiences and challenges. Furthermore, conducting direct interviews with cooperative members could offer deeper insights into women’s individual experiences, empowerment processes, and the ways in which sustainability practices influence their lives.