Policy-making for Indigenous entrepreneurship: towards an inclusive approach

ABSTRACT

This paper investigates the success level of Indigenous entrepreneurship (IE) policies, examines if there is an international dimension to the successes and failures of IE policies, and synthesises lessons from both successful and unsuccessful policies to lead towards a more inclusive approach for the future. Using a narrative systematic review, our findings show that while some IE policies have succeeded, others have either been ineffective, ill-conceived or, in a few cases, have led to worse/negative outcomes for Indigenous entrepreneurs. We unpack lessons from the successful and failed policies and provide suggestions for future policy and research.

RÉSUMÉ

Dans cet article, nous analysons le taux de succès des politiques d’entreprenariat autochtone, nous nous interrogeons sur une potentielle dimension internationale de la réussite ou de l’échec de ces politiques, et nous récapitulons les leçons tirées de ces réussites et de ces échecs dans le but de générer des approches plus inclusives de l’entreprenariat autochtone. Au terme d’une analyse narrative systématique, nous concluons que bien que certaines politiques d’entreprenariat autochtone ont été des succès notoires, d’autres ont été inefficaces, mal conçues ou, dans certains cas, qu’elles ont mené à des résultats plus négatifs ou défavorables pour les entrepreneurs autochtones. Nous tirons ainsi des leçons de ces politiques, qu’elles aient été des succès ou des échecs, et offrons des suggestions pour la formulation de futures politiques et projets de recherche.

KEYWORDS:

• Indigenous entrepreneur
• First Nations
• Native American
• entrepreneurship policy
• Aboriginal

Acknowledgement

The authors gratefully acknowledge the support of the Indigenous people and groups whose suggestions and ideas were vital throughout the research process.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.

Data availability

All our research materials are accessible at the Open Science Framework: https://osf.io/64gsw/?view_only=f9506c41a54f41c982c9ee6ec6c02aa4.

Notes

1 UNPFII. n.d. “Who Are Indigenous Peoples?” United Nations. Accessed 7 December 2022. https://www.un.org/esa/socdev/unpfii/documents/5session_factsheet1.pdf.

2 We found several studies, such as the one by Ayele (2006), which seemed to refer to all citizens of a country as Indigenous. Similarly, the study by Levy (1993) mentioned IE but did not sample any specific Indigenous groups, locations or people other than non-foreign-owned businesses in Tanzania and Sri Lanka. Studies like these were excluded.

3 The journals are International Indigenous Policy Journal, Alternative-An International Journal of Indigenous Peoples, Aboriginal Policy Studies, and Journal of the Native American and Indigenous Studies Association.

4 The papers are Croce (2017), Padilla-Meléndez et al. (2022) and Salmon, Chavez, and Murphy (2022).

5 Some studies used more than one research method, such as a mixture of surveys with interviews. For example, see Rante and Warokka (2013). As a result, research methods were classified based on what all the authors agreed to be the main research tool of the paper.

Additional information

Funding

Michael Olumekor and Sergey N. Polbitsyn acknowledge research funding from Ural Federal University’s (Russian Ministry of Science and Higher Education) priority 2030 program.

Notes on contributors

Michael Olumekor

Michael Olumekor is a Researcher in the Graduate School of Economics and Management at Ural Federal University. His research connects the disciplines of economic sociology, innovation economics and business management. He is particularly interested in the socioeconomic and sociodemographic challenges around entrepreneurship and innovation, broadly defined. This includes entrepreneurship development, public sector innovation, digitalisation, artificial intelligence and sustainable innovation.

Mohammad Saud Khan

Mohammad Saud Khan, PhD, is a Senior Lecturer in the area of Strategic Innovation and Entrepreneurship at Victoria University of Wellington, New Zealand. His research interest is at the nexus of innovation management and entrepreneurship. Dr. Khan’s work has appeared in several reputed outlets such as Journal of Small Business Management, Journal of Business Venturing Insights, Journal of Global Information Management, British Food Journal, Project Management Journal, Management Decision, Leisure Studies and IEEE Transactions on Engineering Management.

Michele Oppioli

Michele Oppioli is a PhD Candidate in Business and Management at the Department of Management, University of Turin (Italy). He is the author of multiple publications on entrepreneurship, artificial intelligence, metaverse technologies, accounting and sustainability. His doctoral research focuses on accounting, public administration and technology adoption in businesses.

Davide Calandra

Davide Calandra is an Assistant Professor in business administration and accounting at the Department of Management ‘Valter Cantino’ in the University of Turin. He is a co-lecturer in the PhD Program in Torino and teaches didactic programs in several institutions, such as Wroclaw University of Business and Economics, and the University of Palermo. His research interests cover new technology applications in accounting, auditing, and accountability as well as the application and management of new technologies in the health sector, such as blockchain and artificial intelligence.

Sergey N. Polbitsyn

Sergey N. Polbitsyn is the Professor of Innovation Management and Entrepreneurship at the Ural Federal University in Russia. He received his master’s degree from Northeastern Illinois University in the United States, and his doctorate from Ural State Agrarian University in the Ural-Siberian parts of Russia. His research interests include entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial ecosystems, innovation policies and systems and the social and economic development of rural communities.