MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6982426973

Indigenous Economic Development: A Tale of Two Wineries

2003· article· en· W6982426973 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicWine Industry and Tourism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndigenousWinerySection (typography)Economic impact analysisWork (physics)Traditional knowledge
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we explore the economic development activities of Indigenous people in the 'new global economy'. This exploration is conducted in four parts. The first provides an overview of Indigenous economic development-the objectives and the process. The second part is a theoretical exploration of the Indigenous approach to development described in the first section in an attempt to assess its feasibility. The third section consists of two case studies of Indigenous development, one about a group of Maori in New Zealand and the other about a group of Aboriginal people in Canada. In each case, the people of the communities involved developed wine-related businesses as a key aspect of their economic development strategy. Indeed, they created the world's first and second Indigenous-owned wineries, the Tohu Winery in New Zealand and Nk'Mip Cellars in Canada. The cases studies briefly document the creation of these wineries and then describe contribution that these businesses have made to the economic development of the communities involved. In the fourth section, we offer concluding comments about Indigenous economic development activities as brought to life by the case studies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.019
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.212
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicWine Industry and TourismFrench-language works237,207