MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411361734 · doi:10.5539/ijef.v17n7p28

Rethinking Technological Innovations Strategies: Challenges and Insights in the Performance of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises in Kenya

2025· article· en· W4411361734 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bwire J. David, Makau S. Muathe

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Journal of Economics and Finance · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicInnovation and Socioeconomic Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndustrial organizationBusinessEconomic geographyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Micro, Small, and Medium Enterprises (MSMEs) in Kenya, totaling 7.4 million, are crucial for socio-economic development and job creation. However, they face significant challenges due to inadequate access to digital services, especially fintech platforms. This study explored how the ease of accessing digital credit, its associated costs, information availability, and the regulatory landscape influence MSME growth in Uasin Gishu County, Kenya. Using an explanatory research design with simple and stratified random sampling, 121 top-level managers or owners were selected. Primary data was collected via semi-structured questionnaires. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics (percentages, frequencies, means, and standard deviations) and inferential statistics (correlation and multiple regression). Findings indicate that the ease of access to digital credit (r=0.673, p<0.001), information availability (r=0.701, p<0.001), and digital credit regulation (r=0.669, p<0.001) all positively and significantly influence MSME growth. Conversely, the cost of digital credit showed a significant negative correlation with MSME growth (r=−0.610, p<0.001). Collectively, these factors explained 60.0% of the variance in MSME growth (Adjusted R2=0.584), with the overall model being statistically significant (F (4,104) =38.921, p<0.001). The study recommends lowering interest rates, government regulation of digital lending practices to protect MSMEs, and policy frameworks that encourage easy information sharing on digital lending to foster MSME growth.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.024
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Journal of Economics and FinanceSame topicInnovation and Socioeconomic DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207