Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No.2, 2023 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet ISSN 2576-1846 (Print) ISSN 2576-1854 (Online) 45 Original Paper Designing a Mixed Model (ANP-SWOT) to Evaluate Practical Scenarios in the Development of Rural Cooperatives in Iran Mohammad Taleghani1 & Ataollah Taleghani 2 1 Department of Industrial Management, Rasht Branch, Islamic Azad University, Rasht, Iran 2 Ted Rogers School of Management, Toronto Metropolitan University, Toronto, Canada Received: March 11, 2023 Accepted: March 27, 2023 Online Published: April 12, 2023 doi:10.22158/fet.v6n2p45 URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/fet.v6n2p45 Abstract Rural cooperatives as a small member-owned organizations are the potential to facilitate socio-economic development in rural areas. This study presents a novel hybrid method to develop strategies for development of rural cooperatives. It combines SWOT analysis, TOWS strategic alternatives matrix, and the analytic network process (ANP). SWOT was used to analyze the external and internal environment of rural cooperatives in Iran using the contributions of a team of experts. This team identified 19 SWOT sub-factors. A TOWS matrix was then constructed and the internal and external environmental sub-factors were combined to create good strategic alternatives. The expert team used the TOWS matrix to identify 11 strategic alternatives. ANP was applied to prioritize the strategic alternatives. According to the experts’ team, the presented combined approach helps managers to choose the best alternative strategies considering both internal and environmental factors. Keywords rural cooperatives, analytical network process, strategy development, SWOT analysis, IRAN 1. Introduction A cooperative is a business or organization owned by and operated for the benefit of those using its services. Profits and earnings generated by the cooperatives are distributed among the members or their user-owners. Cooperatives are organizations with the potential to facilitate socio-economic development and to reduce poverty, especially in rural areas (FAO, 2012; Getnet & Anullo, 2012; United Nations, 2013). They are relevant to the realization of sustainable development goals. Cooperatives help decrease poverty by providing employment, livelihoods, and services (Wanyama, www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 46 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 2019). Rural cooperatives produce economic benefits as well as social development, inclusion, and empowerment (Choobchian, kalantari, Asadi et al. 2015; IFAD, 2014; Sadighi & Darvishinia, 2010). In many countries, agricultural cooperatives help overcome the limitations of family farms to help them compete with capital-intensive farming (Herbel, Rocchigiani, & Ferrier, 2015) by increasing efficiency through increased productivity per unit of input and increased quality per unit of output (Altman, 2018). In china farmer cooperatives connect technical, social and economic dimensions of farming practice. They provide corresponding services to link farmers to relevant actors, include extension agencies, research institutes and supermarkets (Yang, Klerkx, & Leeuwis, 2017). Cooperatives represent a means of maintaining the independence of their members. They enable small-scale producers to scale up their operations, expand their bargaining power, and take better advantage of global market opportunities. These organizations empower farming families by providing access to inputs and services like credit, training, storage facilities, and technology to improve the profitability of smallholder farming. They help farmers process, transport, and market their produce (IFAD, 2014; Suh, 2015; Wanyama, 2019). In addition, cooperatives are a source of stability and predictability to farming. In negotiations with the government over agricultural policy, they have acted on behalf of their members’ interests (Chase, 2019). IFAD (2014) reports that in Africa, cooperatives help young women and men gain access to opportunities that are often blocked by traditional age-related barriers. The role of poverty reduction of cooperatives is well recognized. International organizations such as the FAO, UN, ILO, and International Cooperative Alliance have reported that cooperatives are the most suitable types of organization for addressing all dimensions of reducing poverty and exclusion. The way in which cooperatives reduce poverty varies. They can identify economic opportunities for their members (Lorendahl, 2020), empower the disadvantaged to defend their interests, provide security to the poor by allowing them to convert individual risks into collective risks, and mediate member access to assets that they utilize to earn a living. In rural areas where private businesses hesitate to go and public authorities do not provide basic services, cooperatives play a major self-help role. They give a stronger voice to rural groups and provide opportunities for productive employment as well as offering health care, education, potable water, improved sanitation, roads, and market access (Franks & Mc Gloin, 2017; Henry & Schimmel, 2021). Rural cooperatives are especially important in the developing world because more than half of humanity (3 billion of 5.5 billion people) live in rural areas and most depend directly or indirectly on agriculture for their livelihoods (World Bank, 2017, 2014). The role of agricultural cooperatives is instrumental in helping family farms overcome limitations and become competitive with capital-intensive farming (Herbel et al., 2021). As a whole, strong cooperatives and other producer organizations are able to overcome difficulties by offering their members services such as access to natural resources, information, communication, input and output markets, technologies and training. They facilitate participation in the decision-making process. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 47 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Practices like group purchasing and marketing help farmers gain market power and get better prices on agricultural inputs and other necessities (FAO, 2012). With cooperation, rural residents can have a voice in rural policy-making and to exchange ideas across borders. These organizations put people before profit and help them to achieve shared social, cultural, and economic aspirations. A cooperative is a social enterprise that promotes peace and democracy. The Iranian rural community has a long history of informal cooperatives in community-based organizations. Boneh, Haraseh, and Wareh are examples these cultural and traditional organizations. Formal Iranian rural cooperatives emerged in 1935, when the government established the first rural cooperative in Davoodabad village in Garmsar, but the emergence of rural cooperatives accelerated after the 1979 revolution. The most recent report by the Central Organization of Rural Cooperatives of Iran on the network of rural cooperatives in Iran lists 2941 cooperatives with more than 4,500,000 members. Rural cooperatives and other farming organizations have a far-reaching effect. Since strategy formulation and management is a plan to obtain a sustainable competitive advantage for any firm (Spulber, 2022), the present study developed a novel hybrid method to improve strategy-making for rural cooperatives. The strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT) approach and the threats, opportunities, weaknesses, strengths (TOWS) strategic alternatives matrix were employed in combination with the analytic network process (ANP) to achieve this task. 2. Methodology 2.1 SWOT Analysis SWOT analysis is a simple but useful framework for analyzing organizational strengths and weaknesses (internal environments) and opportunities and threats (external environments). It focuses on strengths, minimizes threats, and takes advantage of opportunities (Wheelen & Hunger, 2012) to attain a systematic approach and support for a decision. It involves systematic thinking and comprehensive diagnosis of factors relating to a new product, technology, management, or planning (Weihrich, 2012). The results categorize factors into internal (strengths, weaknesses) and external (opportunities, threats) and enable decision makers to compare opportunities and threats with strengths and weaknesses. If SWOT analysis is done correctly, it can be a good base for strategy formulation (Babaesmailli, Arbabshirani, & Golmah, 2012), but it cannot quantitatively measure the importance of each factor in decision-making or assess which factor influences most influences a strategic decision (Pesonen, Kurttila, Kangas et al., 2011, Shrestha, Alavalapati, & Kalmbacher, 2014). SWOT has no means of analytically determining the importance of factors or of assessing the fit between SWOT factors and alternative decisions (Babaesmailli et al., 2012). In recent years, researchers have tried to improve this weakness by combining it with techniques such as AHP (Eslamipoor & Sepehriar, 2014, Görener, Toker, & Uluçay, 2012, Lee & Walsh, 2011, Shrestha et al., 2014) and ANP (Zarafshani, Sahraee, & Helms, 2015). Although SWOT approach in www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 48 Published by SCHOLINK INC. combination with AHP can provide a quantitative measure of importance of each factor on decision-making, it also assumes that all factors should be independent and determines the priority of alternatives based on this assumption, which is not always true. Interdependency can exist among SWOT factors and could change the final priority of alternatives (Yüksel & Dagdeviren, 2017); therefore, it is important to consider dependency among the factors. The present study has used the ANP in place of AHP to determine the priority of strategies. ANP can be adopted to accommodate the concern of interdependence among selection factors or clusters (Yüksel & Dagdeviren, 2017). 2.2 TOWS Matrix The TOWS matrix is an essential completion tool. It illustrates how external opportunities and threats facing an organization or a cooperative can be matched with its internal strengths and weaknesses to form four sets of possible strategic alternatives (SO, ST, WO and WT) (Wheelen & Hunger, 2012). SO (maxi-maxi) strategies use strengths to maximize opportunities. ST (maxi-mini) strategies use strengths to minimize threats. WO (mini-maxi) strategies minimize weaknesses by taking advantage of opportunities. WT (mini-mini) strategies minimize weaknesses and avoid threats. This is a good way to take advantage of brainstorming to create alternative strategies that might not otherwise be considered. It forces strategic managers to create various kinds of growth and retrenchment strategies (Weihrich, 2018). SWOT can be applied to create a TOWS matrix to deploy strategies (Aslan, Çınar, & Kumpikaitė, 2012). The internal and external factors obtained through SWOT analysis can be replaced in a TOWS matrix (Figure 1). The TOWS matrix helps to systematically identify relationships between threats, opportunities, weaknesses and strengths, and offers a structure for generating strategies on the basis of these relationships (Weihrich, 2018). TOWS Matrix External Factors Opportunities (O) 1. 2. 3. 4. Threats (T) 1. 2. 3. 4. In te r n a l F a c to r s Strengths (S) 1. 2. 3. SO: Maxi-maxi strategies that use strengths to maximize opportunities ST: Maxi-mini strategies that use strengths to minimize threats Weaknesses (W) 1. 2. 3. WO: Mini-maxi strategies that minimize weaknesses by taking advantage of opportunities WT: Mini-mini strategies that minimize weaknesses and avoid threats Figure 1. TOWS Matrix www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 49 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 2.3 The Analytic Network Process (ANP) The ANP is a multiple-attribute decision-making method that is a generalization of the AHP which considers dependence between elements in the hierarchy. The AHP hierarchy formation is a linear (top-down) structure, where ANP is a non-linear structure that extends in all directions (Sevkli, Oztekin, Uysal et al., 2012). This enables ANP to model complex problems in the real world. This method considers mutual and interdependent relationships among criteria, sub-criteria and alternatives by assessing their relationships (Saaty, 2014). It solves decision-making problems in which interrelations and correlations between decision-making levels (goal, criteria, sub-criteria and alternatives) are considered. The world requires decisions that involve the interaction and dependence of higher-level elements in a hierarchy with lower-level elements. This means they cannot be structured hierarchically; thus, ANP is represented by a network rather than a hierarchy (Saaty & Vargas, 2019). This network includes cycles connecting its components of elements or levels with loops that connect a component to it. Because SWOT factors are not usually independent, it is necessary to determine the inner dependence of SWOT factors by analyzing the effect of each factor on the others. 2.4 Proposed SWOT-TOWS-ANP Model and Its Application The present study introduces a hybrid method to improve strategy-making for rural cooperatives that combines the SWOT approach and TOWS matrix with ANP. Figure 2 compares a hierarchy and a network structure for SWOT-TOWS. The hierarchy (Figure 2.A) comprises a goal, levels of elements, and connections between the elements. These connections are oriented only toward elements in lower levels, but a network (Figure 2.B) has clusters of elements with elements in one cluster connected to elements in another cluster or in the same cluster. A hierarchy is a network with connections going only in one direction (Saaty, 2016). Figure 2 includes outer and inner influences. The first compares the influence of elements in a cluster on elements in another cluster with respect to a control criterion, the latter compares the influence of elements in a group on each other. Figure 2. (A) Linear Hierarchy and (B) Network Structure for SWOT-TOWS B. Network structure A. Linear hierarchy www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 50 Published by SCHOLINK INC. The present study implemented a network structure because the elements of SWOT are dependent. First, the SWOT factors and sub-factors were detected by identifying the internal and external factors of SWOT. An expert team comprising 10 individuals familiar with the central organization of rural cooperatives in Iran was employed. They were invited to meet and became familiar with the research methodology and its aim and were then asked to detect the SWOT factors and sub-factors. They detected 19 SWOT sub-factors (Table 1). Next the TOWS matrix was constructed. The expert team was again employed for SWOT to fulfill the TOWS strategic alternatives matrix. They constructed the TOWS matrix and the SO, ST, WO and WT strategies. Figure 3 indicates the experts identified eleven main strategies for rural cooperatives development based on interactions between SWOT sub-factors. Table 1. SWOT Factors and Sub-factors Internal Factors Strengths (S) Weaknesses (W) S1. Ability to optimize provision of production inputs for members. S2. Facilitate implementation of government policies. S3. Ability to apply professional management. S4. Ability to improve value and supply chains of products. S5. Facilitate provision of technical and financial services. W1. Managers of cooperatives do not have complete authority. W2. Farm ownership is not separate from farm management. W3. Cooperatives have no specific statute. W4. Lack of management knowledge in cooperatives. W5. Poor performance and economic potential of cooperatives External Factors Opportunities (O) Threats (T) O1. Legal support of cooperatives. O2. Existence of governmental facilities and supports. O3. Frequency of rural cooperatives and their members O4. Existence of national and international successful samples. O5. Existence of different levels of support structures from local to international (such as unions). T1. Existence of parallel organizations. T2. Imbalance of national funds for needs of cooperatives. T3. Lack of implementation of legal protection. T4. Instability of government policies and programs. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 51 Published by SCHOLINK INC. TOWS Matrix External Factors Opportunities (O) O1, O2, O3, O4, and O5 Threats (T) T1, T2, T3, and T4 In te r n a l F a c to r s S tr en g th s (S ) S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 SO Maxi-Maxi Strategy SO1. Facilitate procurement of production inputs and develop supply and value chains of rural cooperatives inputs and products to benefit from opportunities such as legal supports and facilities. SO2. Implement public policy and provide technical and financial services using rural cooperatives to benefit from support structures and existing successful examples. SO3. Specialization of management of rural cooperatives to benefit from opportunities. ST Maxi-Mini Strategy ST1. Increase competitiveness and reduce dependency of rural cooperative on financial, legal, and governmental support through provision of production inputs and optimization and improving supply and value chains. ST2. Involve rural cooperatives in policy planning and implementation and provide financial and technical services. ST3. Increase competitiveness and reduce dependency of rural cooperative on financial, legal, and governmental supports by developing and promoting professional management of rural cooperatives. W ea k n es se s (W ) W1 W2 W 3 W 4 W 5 WO Mini-Maxi Strategy WO1. Enhance authority and knowledge of current management and educate professional managers for rural cooperatives to benefit more from available opportunities. WO2. Authorize specific statute for rural cooperatives for multiplicity and existence of successful examples and their support structures. WO3. Develop programs to improve performance and economy of rural cooperatives for maximum benefit of opportunities such as financial support and facilities. WT Mini-Mini Strategy WT1. Improve competitiveness and reduce threats emanating from lack of credit and government support and political and programmatic instability through development of knowledge and rural cooperatives management. WT2. Policymaking and planning to improve performance and economy of rural cooperatives to enhance competitiveness and reduce threats of instability of policies, programs, lack of funding and government supports. Figure 3. TOWS Matrix for Rural Cooperatives Development in Iran www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 52 Published by SCHOLINK INC. The third step develops the network structure of the problem. The network structure of the problem (Figure 1.B) was defined to select the best strategies for rural cooperative development as the goal of network (G). SWOT factors identified as criteria (C), SWOT sub-factors as sub-criteria (SC), and the TOWS strategies as alternatives (A) were placed into the network structure (super matrix Wn): G C SC A Wn G 0 0 0 0 C W21 W22 0 0 SC 0 W32 W33 0 A 0 0 W43 1 When using ANP to model a problem, a network structure should represent the problem and pairwise comparisons are required to establish relations within the structure (Saaty & Vargas, 2013). Questionnaires were designed to allow pairwise comparison. Each expert completed the pairwise comparison matrix between the derived factors. The scale of values represented the intensity of opinion from 1 (equal) to 9 (extreme importance). It was used to detect the priority and interdependency of factors using the geometric mean of expert opinion. Next, the priority of each TOWS strategy was determined using ANP as follows (Babaesmailli et al., 2012; Shakoor Shahabi, Basiri, Rashidi Kahag et al., 2014; Yüksel & Dagdeviren, 2017): 1) Pairwise comparisons of SWOT factors assuming no dependency among factors are used to calculate the weight of the main SWOT factors (criteria) according to the goal (W21). The weight (priority) of each factor is calculated as (Table 2): 2) Comparisons of SWOT factors based on the assumption of dependency between SWOT factors (W22) (Table 3). The weight (priority) of any factor is calculated using Eq. 1. 3) Calculate the weights of relative importance of SWOT groups (W2) by multiplying W21 by W22. W21 W22 W2 0.000 0.672 0.500 0.323 0.427 0.351 W2 = W21× W22= 0.570 0.000 0.250 0.089 × 0.110 0.275 0.333 0.265 0.000 0.588 0.427 = 0.258 0.097 0.063 0.250 0.000 0.037 0.116 4) Pairwise comparison of each SWOT sub-factor (W33) (Table 4) and measurement of the weight of a sub-factor (W3) by multiplying W33 by W2 (Table 5). The priorities of the sub-factors in each factor are calculated using Eq. 1. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 53 Published by SCHOLINK INC. 5) Calculate the relative importance of any alternative strategy (SOi, STi, WOi, WTi) for the corresponding sub-factors. These weights are derived from the relative pairwise comparison matrix (W43) using Eq. 1. 6) Form the super matrix (Wn) using the matrices (W21, W22, W32, W33, and W43). Because the weight of any alternative strategy derives from the normalized supper matrix, normalize the super matrix to calculate the weight of any alternative strategy. 7) Calculate the ultimate weight of any alternative strategy; this requires empowerment of the super matrix to a steady state. The result of super matrix is called the limit matrix (Saaty 2004, Saaty 2006, Saaty and Vargas 2013). The limit matrix was developed using Super Decision software (ver. 2.4). The limit matrix includes the priorities of each TOWS strategy (Table 6). Table 2. Pairwise Comparison of SWOT Factors W21 S W O T Priorities S 1.00 5.00 1.00 9.00 0.427 W 0.20 1.00 0.20 5.00 0.110 O 1.00 5.00 1.00 9.00 0.427 T 0.11 0.20 0.11 1.00 0.037 CR=0.035 Table 3. Inner Dependency Matrix of SWOT Factors vs. Other Factor Strength W O T Priorities W 1.00 2.00 5.00 0.570 O 0.50 1.00 4.00 0.333 T 0.20 0.25 1.00 0.097 CR=0.024 Weakness S O T Priorities S 1.00 3.00 9.00 0.672 O 0.33 1.00 5.00 0.265 T 0.11 0.20 1.00 0.063 CR=0.028 Opportunity S W T Priorities S 1.00 2.00 2.00 0.500 W 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.250 T 0.50 1.00 1.00 0.250 CR=0.000 Threat S W O Priorities www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 54 Published by SCHOLINK INC. S 1.00 4.00 0.50 0.323 W 0.25 1.00 0.17 0.089 O 2.00 6.00 1.00 0.588 CR=0.009 W22 S W O T S 0.000 0.672 0.500 0.323 W 0.570 0.000 0.250 0.089 O 0.333 0.265 0.000 0.588 T 0.097 0.063 0.250 0.000 Table 4. Pairwise Comparison of SWOT Sub-factors (W33) Strengths S1 S2 S3 S4 S5 Priorities S1 1.00 0 0.50 0 0.25 0.25 0.33 0.069 S2 2.00 0 1.00 0 0.33 0.33 0.50 0.111 S3 4.00 0 3.00 3 1.00 1.00 0.50 0.247 S4 4.00 0 3.00 3 1.00 1.00 2.00 0.326 S5 3.00 3 2.00 0 2.00 0.50 1.00 0.247 CR=0.052 Weaknesses W1 W2 W3 W4 W5 Priorities W1 1.00 3.00 2.00 0.20 0.25 0.108 W2 0.33 1.00 0.50 0.14 0.17 0.046 W3 0.50 2.00 1.00 0.17 0.20 0.070 W4 5.00 7.04 6.02 1.00 2.00 0.463 W5 4.00 6.02 5.00 0.50 1.00 0.313 CR=0.027 Opportunities O1 O2 O3 O4 O5 Priorities O1 1.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 0.323 O2 1.00 1.00 3.00 5.00 2.00 0.323 O3 0.33 0.33 1.00 3.00 0.50 0.114 O4 0.20 0.20 0.33 1.00 0.25 0.052 O5 0.50 0.50 2.00 4.00 1.00 0.188 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 55 Published by SCHOLINK INC. CR=0.010 Threats T1 T2 T3 T4 Prioritie s T1 1.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 0.400 T2 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.200 T3 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.200 T4 0.50 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.200 CR=0.000 Table 5. Final Priority of Each SWOT Sub-factor Environment Criteria and priority scores (W2) Sub-Criteria factor priority scores (W33) Sub-Criteria overall priority scores (W3) Sub-Rank Internal Strengths (S) 0.351 S1 0.069 0.024 4 S2 0.111 0.039 3 S3 0.247 0.087 2 S4 0.326 0.114 1 S5 0.247 0.087 2 Weaknesses (W) 0.275 W1 0.108 0.030 3 W2 0.046 0.013 5 W3 0.070 0.019 4 W4 0.463 0.127 1 W5 0.313 0.086 2 External Opportunities (O) 0.258 O1 0.323 0.083 1 O2 0.323 0.083 1 O3 0.114 0.029 3 O4 0.052 0.013 4 O5 0.188 0.048 2 Threats (T) 0.116 T1 0.400 0.046 1 T2 0.200 0.023 2 T3 0.200 0.023 2 T4 0.200 0.023 2 3. Result The present study offered a hybrid method as a strategy for rural cooperative development. The SWOT technique was first used to analyze the internal and external environment of rural cooperatives. SWOT identified the strategic factors and sub-factors through the use of expert opinion. Next, a TOWS www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 56 Published by SCHOLINK INC. strategic alternatives matrix constructed SO, ST, WO and WT strategies. A total of 11 strategies were defined. The SWOT factors and sub-factors had inner and outer dependency; thus, ANP was implemented to determine the dependencies among factors, sub-factors, and the final priority of alternative strategies. The results indicate that implementation of SO2, SO1 and ST2 strategies are of greater priority than the other strategies. These strategies can play a central role in development of rural cooperatives in Iran. It seems such enhanced version of SWOT analysis method is capable to provide enriched insights for strategic management. It can help managers to choose the best alternative strategies considering both internal and environmental factors. Because these factors and sub-factors that affect decision- and strategy-making are generally dependent, application of ANP in combination with SWOT analysis and TOWS matrix comprised a useful and successful tool for strategy-making and choosing between strategic alternatives. 4. Discussion 4.1 Internal and External Environment Space of Rural Cooperatives This study used the ANP-SWOT-TOWS hybrid method to choose better strategies the development of for rural Iranian cooperatives (RICs) assuming dependency. Table 5 and Figure 4 show that in the internal space, the strengths (0.351) of rural cooperatives were greater than the weaknesses (0.275). Strength S4 was the most important strength for the RICs and S1 was the least important (Figure 5). Weakness W4 (lack of management knowledge) was the most important weakness and W2 (ownership of farms not separate from farm management) was the least important. In the external space, the opportunities (0.258) were greater than the threats (0.116). Table 5 and Figure 5 shows that the greatest opportunity was O1 (legal supports of cooperatives) and the greatest threat was T1 (existence of parallel organizations). Figure 4 shows that the internal challenges of the RICs (weaknesses) are greater than its external challenges (threats) and the positive aspects of the RICs (strengths and opportunities) are greater than its negative aspects (weaknesses and threats). www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 57 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Figure 4. Internal and External Environment Space of RICs (SWOT Factors) Figure 5. Graphical Interpretation of Pairwise Comparisons of SWOT Sub-factors 4.2 Proposed TOWS Strategies for IRC Development The inner and outer dependency of the SWOT factors and sub-factors indicates that SO strategies are the most powerful TOWS strategies for RIC development and WT strategies are the least powerful (Figure 6). The final priorities of the alternative strategies are shown in Figure 7 and Table 6. They indicate that SO2, SO1, and ST2 are, in order, the three best TOWS strategies and WO2 is the weakest TOWS strategy for RIC development. www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 58 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Figure 6. TOWS Strategy Spaces for RICs Figure 7. Graphical Interpretation of TOWS Strategies Space of RIC Table 6. Priorities for Each TOWS Strategy Alternatives group Alternatives Normal Ideal Ranking SO (0.331) SO1 0.131 0.980 2 SO2 0.134 1.000 1 SO3 0.066 0.492 10 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 59 Published by SCHOLINK INC. ST (0.320) ST1 0.099 0.742 6 ST2 0.111 0.83 3 ST3 0.110 0.823 4 WO (0.175) WO1 0.105 0.783 5 WO2 0.005 0.033 11 WO3 0.066 0.494 9 WT (0.174) WT1 0.094 0.706 7 WT2 0.080 0.594 8 As was observed above, this study presented a combined approach to help managers choose the best alternative strategies considering both internal and environmental factors. Because these factors and sub-factors that affect decision- and strategy-making are generally dependent, application of ANP in combination with SWOT analysis and TOWS strategic alternatives matrix comprised a useful and successful tool for strategy-making and choosing between strategic alternatives. References Altman, M. (2018). Cooperative Organizations as an Engine of Equitable Rural Economic Development. Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management, 3(1), 14-23. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2015.02.001 Aslan, I., Orhan, Ç., & Vilmantė, K. (2012). Creating Strategies from Tows Matrix for Strategic Sustainable Development of Kipaş Group. Journal of Business Economics and Management, 13(1), 95-110. https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2011.620134 Babaesmailli, M., Behrooz, A., & Vahid, G. (2012). Integrating Analytical Network Process and Fuzzy Logic to Prioritize the Strategies – a Case Study for Tile Manufacturing Firm. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 925-935. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.07.090 Chase, J. (2019). Regional Prestige: Cooperatives and Agroindustrial Identity in Southwest Goiás, Brazil. Agriculture and Human Values, 20(1), 37-51. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022485224726 Choobchian, Sh., kh. kalantari, A. A., & Taghavi Motlagh, S. A. (2015). Measurement and Comparison of Different Dimensions of Sustainable Coastal Fishing Management in Beach Seine Cooperatives in Guilan. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 17(6), 1463-1472. Eslamipoor, R., & Sepehriar, A. (2014). Firm Relocation as a Potential Solution for Environment Improvement Using a Swot-Ahp Hybrid Method. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 92(3), 269-276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2013.02.003 FAO. (2012). Agricultural Co-Operatives. Key to Feeding the World. Rome: FAO. Franks, J. R., & Gloin, A. Mc. (2007). Environmental Co-Operatives as Instruments for Delivering across-Farm Environmental and Rural Policy Objectives: Lessons for the Uk. Journal of Rural Studies, 23(4), 472-489. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.03.002 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2015.02.001 https://doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2011.620134 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.07.090 https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022485224726 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2013.02.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2007.03.002 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 60 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Getnet, K., & Anullo, T. (2012). Agricultural Cooperatives and Rural Livelihoods: Evidence from Ethiopia. Annals of Public and Cooperative Economics, 83(2), 181-198. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8292.2012.00460.x Görener, A., Toker, K., & Uluçay, K. (2012). Application of Combined Swot and Ahp: A Case Study for a Manufacturing Firm. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 58, 1525-1534. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1139 Henry, H., & Schimmel, C. (2021). Cooperatives for People-Centred Rural Development. ILO. Herbel, D., Rocchigiani, M., & Ferrier, C. (2021). The Role of the Social and Organisational Capital in Agricultural Co-Operatives’ Development Practical Lessons from the Cuma Movement. Journal of Co-operative Organization and Management, 3(1), 24-31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2015.02.003 IFAD. (2014). International Day of Cooperatives: Rural Cooperative Enterprises Boost Sustainable Development. Retrieved from http://www.ifad.org/media/events/2014/cooperatives.htm Lee, S., & Walsh, P. (2011). Swot and Ahp Hybrid Model for Sport Marketing Outsourcing Using a Case of Intercollegiate Sport. Sport Management Review, 14(4), 361-369. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2010.12.003 Lorendahl, B. (2020). New Cooperatives and Local Development: A Study of Six Cases in Jämtland, Sweden. Journal of Rural Studies, 12(2), 143-150. https://doi.org/10.1016/0743-0167(96)00006-X Pesonen, M., Kurttila, M., Kangas, J., Kajanus, M., & Heinonen, P. (2011). Assessing the Priorities Using A'wot among Resource Management Strategies at the Finnish Forest and Park Service. Forest Science, 47(4), 534-541. Saaty, T. L. (2014). Decision Making—the Analytic Hierarchy and Network Processes (Ahp/Anp). Journal of systems science and systems engineering, 13(1), 1-35. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11518-006-0151-5 Saaty, T. L. (2016). The Analytic Network Process. In Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process (pp. 1-26). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-33987-6_1 Saaty, T. L., & Luis, G. V. (2019). Decision Making with the Analytic Network Process: Economic, Political, Social and Technological Applications with Benefits, Opportunities, Costs and Risks. New York: Springer US. Sadighi, H., & Darvishinia, A. A. (2010). Farmers’ Professional Satisfaction with the Rural Production Cooperative Approach. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 7(Number 1&2), 1-8. Sevkli, M., Oztekin, A., Uysal, O., Torlak, G., Turkyilmaz, A., & Delen, D. (2012). Development of a Fuzzy Anp Based Swot Analysis for the Airline Industry in Turkey. Expert Systems with Applications, 39(1), 14-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.047 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8292.2012.00460.x https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.09.1139 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcom.2015.02.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.smr.2010.12.003 https://doi.org/10.1016/0743-0167(96)00006-X https://doi.org/10.1007/s11518-006-0151-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-33987-6_1 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2011.06.047 www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/fet Frontiers in Education Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, 2023 61 Published by SCHOLINK INC. Shakoor Shahabi, R., Basiri, M. H., Kahag, M. R., & Zonouzi, S. A. (2014). An Anp–Swot Approach for Interdependency Analysis and Prioritizing the Iran׳S Steel Scrap Industry Strategies. Resources Policy, 42, 18-26. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2014.07.001 Shrestha, R. K., Janaki, R. R. Alavalapati, & Robert, S. K. (2014). Exploring the Potential for Silvopasture Adoption in South-Central Florida: An Application of Swot–Ahp Method. Agricultural Systems, 81(3), 185-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2003.09.004 Spulber, D. F. (2022). Economic Analysis and Management Strategy: A Survey Continued. Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, 3(2), 355-406. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1430-9134.1994.00355.x Suh, J. (2015). Communitarian Cooperative Organic Rice Farming in Hongdong District, South Korea. Journal of Rural Studies, 37, 29-37. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.11.009 United Nations. (2013). Cooperatives in Social Development and the Observance of the International Year of Cooperatives. Vol. A/68/168. Session of the General Assembly. A/68/168. New York. Wanyama, F. O. (2019). Cooperatives and the Sustainable Development Goals: A Contribution to the Post-2015 Development Debate. ILO. Weihrich, H. (2018). The Tows Matrix—A Tool for Situational Analysis. Long Range Planning, 15(2), 54-66. https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0 Wheelen, T. L., & Hunger, J. D. (2012). Strategic Management and Business Policy: Toward Global Sustainability. New York Pearson/Prentice Hall. World Bank. (2017). World Development Report 2008: Agriculture for Development. Washington DC: The World Bank. World Bank. (2014). World Bank Annual Report 2014. Washington DC The World Bank. Yang, H., Klerkx, L., & Leeuwis, C. (2017). Functions and Limitations of Farmer Cooperatives as Innovation Intermediaries: Findings from China. Agricultural Systems, 127, 115-125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.02.005 Yüksel, İ., & Dagdeviren, M. (2017). Using the Analytic Network Process (Anp) in a Swot Analysis–a Case Study for a Textile Firm. Information Sciences, 177(16), 3364-3382. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2007.01.001 Zarafshani, K., Sahraee, M., & Helms, M. (2015). Strategic Potential of the Vermicompost Agribusiness in Iran: A Swot Analysis. Journal of Agricultural Science and Technology, 17(6), 1393-1408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resourpol.2014.07.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2003.09.004 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1430-9134.1994.00355.x https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jrurstud.2014.11.009 https://doi.org/10.1016/0024-6301(82)90120-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agsy.2014.02.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2007.01.001