حقوق مالکیت زمین های بومی، کارآفرینی و توسعه اقتصادی در کانادا: "امید بستن به داخل" برای اقتصاد جهانی
|کد مقاله||سال انتشار||مقاله انگلیسی||ترجمه فارسی||تعداد کلمات|
|6922||2006||11 صفحه PDF||سفارش دهید||محاسبه نشده|
Publisher : Elsevier - Science Direct (الزویر - ساینس دایرکت)
Journal : Journal of World Business, Volume 41, Issue 1, February 2006, Pages 45–55
Indigenous people are struggling to reassert their nationhood within the post-colonial states in which they find themselves. Claims to their traditional lands and the right to use the resources of these lands are central to their drive to nationhood. Traditional lands are the ‘place’ of the nation and are inseparable from the people, their culture, and their identity as a nation. Traditional lands and resources are the foundation upon which indigenous people intend to rebuild the economies of their nations and so improve the socioeconomic circumstance of their people—individuals, families, communities, and nations. This paper explores business development activities that flow from the later aspect of indigenous land rights in a Canadian context, suggesting that the process is a particular and important instance of social entrepreneurship.
There are various types of entrepreneurs identified in the literature and these are usually divided into groups that share an adjective in common; for example, nascent, novice, serial, and so on. Woo, Cooper, and Dunkelberg (1991) developed and interpreted entrepreneurship typologies. More recently, there has been discussion about social entrepreneurs. Mort, Weerawardena, and Carnegie (2003) define social entrepreneurship, as “the entrepreneurship leading to the establishment of new social enterprises and the continued innovation in existing ones” (p. 76). These authors conceptualize social entrepreneurship as a multidimensional construct involving the expression of virtuous behavior in order to achieve a social mission, a coherent unity of purpose and action in the face of moral complexity, the ability to recognize social value-creating opportunities and decision-making characteristics of innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking. Similarly, Pearce (2003) distinguishes social enterprise from other forms by emphasizing the following: social purpose is the principal driver of activity, with organizational sustainability as a core objective; social purpose is achieved primarily through entrepreneurship; there is little if any distribution of profit to individuals, as any surplus is reinvested for the long-term benefit of the community; constituents are democratically involved; and there is accountability. Borzaga and Defourny (2001) emphasize that social enterprise includes the creation of jobs and the strengthening of social capital by supporting the integration of marginal people into society at large. It is our contention that the development activities of indigenous people in Canada and elsewhere are entirely consistent with the definitions above and are therefore a particular and important instance of social entrepreneurship. We begin our exploration of indigenous development as social entrepreneurship by discussing the importance and context of indigenous development globally and in Canada in particular. This is followed by a discussion of development theory and an assessment of the theoretical feasibility of the Aboriginal approach to development, which we contend is grounded on a foundation of social entrepreneurship. This is followed by three case studies, researched by our team using secondary research as well as interviews and triangulation (Patton, 1990). These case studies provide powerful evidence of the importance of entrepreneurship—the identification of opportunities and the creation of enterprises to exploit these opportunities—in the Aboriginal economic development process. Especially evident are the prevalence of community ownership and the acknowledgment of the importance of long-term profitability and growth of businesses created, not as an end but as the means to an end. And it is these ends that make their activities social entrepreneurship. Some of these ends included the creation of employment with characteristics that ‘fit’ the interest, capabilities, and preferred lifestyles of community members; control of traditional lands and activities on these lands; and the creation of wealth to fund education, health and wellness, housing, and other social programs.
نتیجه گیری انگلیسی
After centuries of struggle buttressed by decisions of the Supreme Court of Canada, during the final three decades of the 20th Century, the approach to indigenous claims has shifted from contention to negotiation and enterprise. No longer does the state contest the existence of indigenous rights to land, resources, and some form of ‘self-government’. Instead, it seeks to negotiate agreements based on these rights that will form the foundation for prosperous indigenous ‘nations’ within Canada. The key to achieving such prosperity is Aboriginal entrepreneurship and economic development, building on the capacity provided by the settlements. Based on the business development experience of the Inuvialuit, the Osoyoos Indian Band, and the La Ronge First Nation, this approach seems promising. The approach is also clearly a particular instance of social entrepreneurship. While what these Aboriginal groups have done as they have identified opportunities and created business is clearly entrepreneurship their reasons for doing so and the organizational forms they have adopted extend far beyond wealth creation for the entrepreneur(s)/owner(s) involved. The wealth is generated to fund social objectives, broadly defined. Equally important, the day-to-day activities of the businesses are conducted with social objectives in mind. What are expenses to entrepreneurs (salaries, training and development, purchases of inputs, and so on) and something to be minimized, are seen by those developing businesses in these communities as opportunities to deliver socioeconomic benefits. These are exploited to the extent it is economically feasible to do so. Finally, the social nature of the process is also found in the activity that lies at the heart of entrepreneurship—opportunity identification. A key criterion in the search for and identification of suitable opportunities is the extent of fit with a community's broad objectives and with the capabilities and aspirations (including lifestyle preferences) of community members. Surely these actions and objectives are entirely consistent with the description of social entrepreneurship by Pearce (2003), Borzaga and Defourny (2001), and Mort et al. (2003) as discussed in Section 1. Indigenous people elsewhere are also seeking recognition of their land and other rights. This is particularly true in New Zealand and Australia where the Maori and the Aborigines have rights and aspirations similar to indigenous people in Canada, but it also in Mexico, Central and South America, Africa, Northern Europe, and Asia. The Canadian experiences described suggests that the just settlement of indigenous land claim might be a effective way for states to address the socioeconomic circumstances of its indigenous people while at the same time addressing their ‘national aspirations’, and that social entrepreneurship has an important role to ply in this process. How much better this than armed struggle and violent suppression as has been, and still is, the reality in many places.