Modular individuals navigating adversity through enacting sumud: the case of internally displaced Palestinian women entrepreneurs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Living in a society governed by discriminatory laws, Palestinian women face multiple layers of adversities in proving themselves equal members of society. Tedious procedures involved in starting businesses make entrepreneurship a difficult option for aspiring, competent women situated in stifling surroundings which synonymise entrepreneurship with masculinity (Ahl, 2006; Morrar, et al., 2021; Sultan, 2016). Nevertheless, despite difficulties finding employment, entrepreneurship still presents a promising solution to navigate the adversities of patriarchy, occupation and displacement. Furthermore, although notably underrepresented in research and despite modest statistics, Palestinian women entrepreneurs contribute socio-economic benefits towards their communities and for national employment (Al-Mahaidi et al., 2019; IDMC, 2019; UNHCR, 2021). Entrepreneurship and organization theory carry potential for reciprocal benefit in theorizing responses to adversity (Shepherd and Williams; 2020). Our first aim is to demonstrate how internally displaced Palestinian women entrepreneurs, as modular individuals, operate their businesses under adverse conditions by navigating epistemic injustice in their entrepreneurial ecosystem and engaging in epistemic resistance through enacting Sumud. In doing so, we provide contextual evidence for Shepherd and Williams’ (2020) proposition that resilience may be the most common response to adversity, enabling entrepreneurial action as a response and eventually entrepreneurial action can reinforce resilience. Following Wiliams et al., (2017, p. 742), we define resilience as “the process by which an actor builds and uses its capability endowments to interact with the environment in a way that positively adjusts and maintains functioning amidst adversity”; a definition resonating with epistemic resistance (Medina, 2017; Pohlhaus, 2017). While the theory of epistemic injustice explores the backstory of injustice, our study utilises the lens of modular individuals to illustrate how women entrepreneurs engage in epistemic resistance as resilience in an effort to reduce and reform institutional sources and individual iterations of injustice (Abdelnour et al., 2017). Alluding to Edward Said (1995), but in the context of entrepreneurship, while the roles and tactics women entrepreneurs enact as social actors would represent a form of Sumud; representing epistemic resistance in the Palestinian context, our second aim is to look into the role of organizations in moving past acknowledgement and accountability to ‘something resembling an actual victory’, perhaps from within, by institutionalizing justice in the Palestinian entrepreneurial ecosystem (Said & Rabbani, 1995; pg. 70).
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".