MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2936451046 · doi:10.15353/pced.v18i0.91

Small Business and Social Enterprise: To Thrive Not Fail

2019· article· en· W2936451046 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Tina Barton

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers in Canadian Economic Development · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCommunity Development and Social Impact
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBusinessSmall businessGovernment (linguistics)ProcurementSocial enterpriseIncentiveMarketingNew business developmentFinanceBusiness modelPublic relationsEconomicsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Small businesses (those with up to 99 employees) are the most common business type in Canada – comprising 97.9 per cent of businesses, and contributing close to one-third of Canada’s gross domestic product (GDP). Yet a significant number of these businesses fail, with only about 50 per cent lasting at least five years, according to Industry Canada. Social enterprises – businesses that provide valuable products or services while delivering social and sometime environmental returns – struggle even more than small businesses to attract finance, grow, and sustain. What are the similarities and differences between these two groups’ needs, and how can Canada’s three levels of government and the broader business ecosystem better support small businesses and social enterprises to thrive? This paper takes a comprehensive look at key business needs, barriers to success, enabling factors, and policy incentives, drawing upon academic literature, studies and reports from the government, non-profit, and social enterprise sectors, as well as recommendations from business advocacy groups primarily from Canada and the United States. Keywords: Small business, social enterprise, business financing, business growth, business ecosystem, procurement policy

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)0.002
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.747
Threshold uncertainty score0.508

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.009
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.206
Teacher spread0.178 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapers in Canadian Economic DevelopmentSame topicCommunity Development and Social ImpactFrench-language works237,207