Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise Insolvency: A Modular Approach
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This new book systematically examines the current process for distressed Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs), and proposes a different, more appropriate, "modular" approach to the treatment of such entities when faced with insolvency proceedings.MSMEs play a vital role in virtually all global economies. They are a primary means by which entrepreneurs bring new business propositions to the market, and deliver a range of products and services to local economies. MSMEs tend to be more reliant on favourable legal and regulatory climates to survive and thrive than larger businesses, and insolvency regimes are often more tailored to these larger businesses, assuming an extensive insolvency estate of significant worth, and the presence of creditors and other concerned stakeholders to participate in and oversee the process. These assumptions and features are generally incongruous with the reality of MSMEs, for whom assets are of less value and whose stakeholders are generally more disinterested.The modular approach proposed in this book addresses the imbalances, inconsistencies, and lack of supervision which is often apparent in treatment of insolvent MSMEs. It provides an overview of existing approaches to MSME insolvency, the place of MSMEs in the global economy, and the particular needs of MSMEs in financial distress. It then sets out the procedural framework, policy objectives, and key components of the modular approach, detailing how a choice of modules enables national policy-makers a more flexible process for resolution. It then outlines the roles, positions, and obligations of key stakeholder groups, and explains the managerial, administrative, and judicial functions of this approach. Finally, it explains how elements of the broader legal system should be aligned with, and supportive of, the optimal functioning of the modular approach. [From Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprise Insolvency | Riz Mokal | 9780198799931 | Oxford University Press Canada]
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".