MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412702168 · doi:10.5539/jel.v14n6p385

A Model for Sustainable Success in Herbal Business: Educational Strategies for Entrepreneurial Growth

2025· article· en· W4412702168 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Sanyasorn Swasthaisong, Wasin Petchpongpan, Pissadarn Saenchat, Lamai Romyen, Nathichai Thanaraj, Archsuek Mameekul

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Education and Learning · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicEntrepreneurship Studies and Influences
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinistry of Higher Education, Science, Research and Innovation, ThailandSakon Nakhon Rajabhat University
KeywordsSustainabilityStructural equation modelingBusinessConfirmatory factor analysisGovernment (linguistics)MarketingSocial capitalCritical success factorSample (material)Business model

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study explored the key factors influencing the sustainable success of herbal businesses in Sakon Nakhon Province, Thailand, amid the growing global demand for herbal products. The research focused on the economic, social, environmental, and managerial aspects affecting sustainability and competitiveness. We employed a quantitative research approach, including Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) and Structural Equation Modeling (SEM), with a sample of 342 herbal business entrepreneurs. It was found that cultural factors, local knowledge, and social capital had the most direct effect on business success (1.271, p < .01). These were followed by external factors like government support and consumer demand (0.486, p < .05) and finally, internal factors like business strategy and management (0.126, p < .05). The study confirms that these variables are essential for developing effective business models to enhance growth, sustainability, and regional economic development. Additionally, the research identifies strategies to optimize management practices, innovation, and marketing tailored to the local herbal industry. These insights serve as valuable resources for stakeholders aiming to strengthen the sector and promote long-term success.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.285
Teacher spread0.271 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Education and LearningSame topicEntrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFrench-language works237,207