MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2038180674 · doi:10.1111/awr.12043

Radical Entrepreneurs: First Nations Designers’ Approaches to Community Economic Development

2014· article· en· W2038180674 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Cory Willmott

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropology of Work Review · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFashion and Cultural Textiles
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersAcademy of Finland
KeywordsIndigenousSocial capitalEntrepreneurshipVisibilityEthnic groupParticipant observationSociologySymbolic capitalEconomic geographyPolitical scienceEconomic growthGeographyEconomicsSocial scienceAnthropologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Over the past 15 years, contemporary Native Canadian fashion designers have been gaining increasing visibility and economic viability. Yet, their roles and purposes remain poorly understood. This article identifies a problem with conventional approaches to the question of Community Economic Development and Aboriginal participants in the garment industry in the New Economy. It proposes an alternative model based on the concept of the “radical entrepreneur,” which incorporates ideas surrounding ethnic economies, “social entrepreneurship,” symbolic capital, and “rootedness” in indigenous cultures and societies. Insights drawn from participant observation among, and interviews with, members of a Canada‐wide network of contemporary aboriginal fashion designers demonstrate that these “radical entrepreneurs” work as agents of social change both within their own indigenous communities and among national and international participants in a global fashion geography.

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)0.014
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.073

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0140.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.026
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.192
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.092 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropology of Work ReviewSame topicFashion and Cultural TextilesFrench-language works237,207