MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986582661 · doi:10.1080/0376835032000149243

Service provision for street-based traders in Pietermaritzburg, KwaZulu-Natal: comparing local findings to lessons drawn from Africa and Asia

2003· article· en· W1986582661 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Andrea Mayrhofer, Sheryl L. Hendriks

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopment Southern Africa · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicTaxation and Compliance Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIncentiveInformal sectorEntrepreneurshipService (business)BusinessQuarter (Canadian coin)Economic growthTertiary sector of the economyService delivery frameworkService providerMarketingEconomicsFinanceMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

South Africa's informal economy absorbs approximately one-quarter of the labour force of 15 million people and is therefore the fastest growing sector of employment. Street-based trading constitutes a major subsector within the informal economy and is continuously expanding through unrelenting proliferation of survivalist micro-enterprises. However, few organisations that support enterprises are accessible or appropriate to survivalist and informal sector micro-enterprises. Interviews were conducted with 98 Pietermaritzburg street-based traders and ten KwaZulu-Natal service providers to determine service provision requirements. The results are compared with findings of four international studies. The findings suggest that for survivalist enterprises to benefit from entrepreneurial education and training services, obstacles with regard to South African traders' understanding of entrepreneurship and cultural limitations to enterprise growth should be overcome. Service institutions also require incentives to serve the informal sector, as well as the capacity to design and deliver appropriate services.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.244
Threshold uncertainty score0.486

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.081
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.160 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDevelopment Southern AfricaSame topicTaxation and Compliance StudiesFrench-language works237,207