Mobilizing Female Entrepreneurship Research to Inform Policy
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Gender and entrepreneurship scholars are increasingly called upon to consider policy implications in both identifying research questions and analyzing research results. Similarly, policy professionals are looking to inform policy with best available evidence. Yet, gaps between policy and gender and entrepreneurship scholars remain in both the availability of policy relevant academic research and the applied use of such research within policy domains. This dissertation represents an attempt to fill at least part of this gap by three diverse methods as represented in chapters two through four. Chapter two leverages qualitative methodology to a real-time policy problem and explores how women entrepreneurs experienced the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic to inform the development of specific policy supports. Chapter three leverages an application of the public organization management science approach to identify policy relevant research questions for gender and entrepreneurship scholars, alongside of a review of current literature. Chapter four advances a particular policy relevant research question of special relevance within the current Canadian context, the impact of institutional support, subnational variation and providing unpaid care on the choice to become an entrepreneur. Collectively, these papers aim to advance theory, policy, and practice in helping to close the gap between the academy and policy professionals. The main limitation of this thesis is scope, as the setting both academically and for policy is limited to Alberta. Despite this, the findings of from this thesis can be broadly applied to both theory and practice. Contributions include an increased recognition of who policymakers are and what they are looking for alongside of an extension to the institutional theory of gender inequality of entrepreneurial entry. Future research can further explore policy-relevant research questions such as implications of subnational variations in institutional context on 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 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 | 0.045 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.003 |
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".