17 Indigenous entrepreneurial finance: Mapping the landscape with Canadian evidence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This chapter considers the evolving landscape of financing sources available for Indigenous entrepreneurs using Canada as an example. The aim is to suggest how, in the colonial environment of Canadian financial services, Indigenous people have not only been able to lobby for access to funding, but also have found ways of marshalling their own financial resources to support entrepreneurship. An overview of the literature on Indigenous entrepreneurship and Indigenous finance brings out their distinctive character and value orientation. An outline is given of resources available for Indigenous entrepreneurship in Canada, from governmental initiatives through arrangements offered by mainstream financial institutions and government to innovative organizations assembled by Indigenous people themselves. Three vital questions for future research are identified: (1) should the institutions mobilized by Indigenous people themselves remain niche organizations, perhaps bridging entrepreneurs to mainstream options, or should these institutions seek to enlarge their role? (2) Does accessing funds from mainstream sources, or even from Indigenous organizations immersed in a profit-based, market environment, risk perpetuating dependency and undermining distinctive Indigenous interests and values? (3) What should the role of mainstream organizations be in relation to the distinctive character of Indigenous entrepreneurship?
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 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".