MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2589122180 · doi:10.1108/jeee-10-2015-0059

Aboriginal entrepreneurship financing in Canada

2017· article· en· W2589122180 on OpenAlexaffabout
Laura Elizabeth Pinto, Levon Blue

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIndigenous Health, Education, and Rights
Canadian institutionsOntario Tech University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEntrepreneurshipMainstreamIndigenousNarrativeProsperitySociologyPublic relationsScope (computer science)Equity (law)Political scienceBusinessEconomicsEconomic growthFinance

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose This paper aims to explore Canadian in/exclusion of Aboriginal groups to/from access to mainstream business resources and opportunities. The focus is one prominent non-governmental program, the Canadian Aboriginal Prosperity and Entrepreneurship (CAPE) Fund, designed to provide equity to Aboriginal businesses. Do programs such as CAPE Fund promote Aboriginal entrepreneurship that liberates “others” on their own terms? or are they “civilizing missions” that attempt to impose Euro-centric practices and values? Design/methodology/approach The authors critically analyze the “promises” of entrepreneurship through CAPE Fund using TribalCrit, a framework rooted in critical race theory (CRT) and postcolonialism. The authors used a CRT research method highlighting two organizational narratives, describing CAPE Fund financing in two separate ventures. The research allowed to test the theory’s use in practical situations. Findings This paper develops a postcolonial conception of entrepreneurship to address the realities and needs of Aboriginal communities. Analysis of Canada’s CAPE Fund within two organizational narratives identified aspects of promise (active Aboriginal business ownership) and shortcomings (practices that attempted to erase inequity in ways that led to neocolonial subjugation). Research limitations/implications This paper attempts to build theory while engaging in CRT research that relies on organizational narratives. Narrative approaches offer depth of understanding but are not generalizable because of the limited scope of organizations studied. Practical implications The research methods used and framework developed offer researchers new approaches to better understand Indigenous and Aboriginal entrepreneurship outcomes. The findings point to specific Aboriginal funding issues that can be addressed by other funding agencies who wish to create more inclusive structures. Social implications Financial programs that might improve the possibility of self-determination of Aboriginal peoples within the postcolonial ideal must “hold both economic and non-economic objectives in tension” (Overall et al. , 2010 p. 157) in ways that typically disadvantage Aboriginal entrepreneurs. Originality/value This is the first, fully articulated framework for postcolonial entrepreneurship, grounded in CRT and applied to analyze Canada’s CAPE Fund.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.285
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.286 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations15
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging EconomiesSame topicIndigenous Health, Education, and RightsFrench-language works237,207