Elite Capture in the Social Enterprise Sector: Examining the Impact of Community Wealth on Social Enterprise Funding in Western Canada’s Metropolitan Areas
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Social Enterprises are unique organizations, differentiated from for-profit firms and traditional nonprofits by their pursuit of social objectives through participation in the market. Although these organizations have existed in some shape or form for many years, the reorganization of the welfare state has had an important impact on Social Enterprises. One effect has been the increasing penetration of elites in the many types of Third Sector organizations. This paper outlines the Social Enterprise sector in Canada and finds some support for the existence of Elite Resource Capture in four major cities in Western Canada. Using Census data and survey data of Social Enterprises in Vancouver, Victoria, Edmonton and Calgary, different measures of community wealth are seen to positively correlate with the ability of Social Enterprises to obtain non-earned income sources such as grants, loans and donations. Additional positive correlations are found between the different measures of community wealth and measures of organizational strength, such as the age of Social Enterprises and their number of full-time employees. Three policies are suggested to ensure a better distribution on non-earned income sources across the sector.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".