Accompagnement entrepreneurial et accès au financement : le cas de la relève agricole au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les besoins de financement sont identifiés comme étant l’une des principales barrières à l’entrée dans le secteur agricole. Bien que les contributions de l’accompagnement entrepreneurial dans l’accès aux ressources externes soient reconnues dans la littérature, peu de recherches ont été menées dans le secteur agricole. Cette étude vise à comprendre comment le recours à l’accompagnement entrepreneurial peut influer sur la perception des financeurs en ce qui concerne la solvabilité des projets et ainsi contribuer à l’accès au financement dans le cas spécifique de l’installation en agriculture, en mobilisant les théories de la relation banque-entreprise et du signal. Les résultats montrent que l’utilisation de l’accompagnement est un signal rassurant les prêteurs – notamment quant à la qualité des entrepreneurs et au potentiel de succès du projet – et contribue ainsi à faciliter l’accès au financement.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".