MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2243269985 · doi:10.11575/prism/28027

The Challenges of African Immigrants’ Entrepreneurship in Canada: A Case Study of African Immigrants Residing in Calgary

2015· dissertation· en· W2243269985 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Animwaa Obeng-Akrofi

Bibliographic record

VenuePRISM (University of Calgary) · 2015
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Policy, and Dickens Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsImmigrationEntrepreneurshipGeographyPolitical scienceGender studiesDemographic economicsEconomic growthDevelopment economicsSociologyEconomicsArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The goal of this research is to analyze the challenges that African immigrants encounter in entrepreneurship. The Canadian government acknowledges that immigrant entrepreneurship is important for the economic growth of the country and thus has made Canada a viable place for immigrant entrepreneurs. Little is known about African immigrant in entrepreneurship. Therefore this study gives a voice to African immigrant entrepreneurs by employing a qualitative in-depth interview method to understand the challenges encountered by these entrepreneurs in Calgary. Major findings of the study include: racism from whites, internalized racism and gender differences. Critical Race Theory and Feminist theory were the theoretical frameworks used in the study. The study has also examined how racism and sexism interplay and disadvantage Black women in entrepreneurship. This research is to fill in gaps in literature on immigrant entrepreneurship in Canada by adding the experiences of African immigrants and analyzing how racism against racialised groups in Canada continues to exist.

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)0.003
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.314

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0430.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePRISM (University of Calgary)Same topicMigration, Policy, and Dickens StudiesFrench-language works237,207