مشخصات مقاله | |
ترجمه عنوان مقاله | چشم انداز نهادی در سطح کشور در مورد بهره وری کارآفرینی: اثرات اقتصاد و مقررات غیررسمی |
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله | A country-level institutional perspective on entrepreneurship productivity: The effects of informal economy and regulation |
انتشار | مقاله سال 2020 |
تعداد صفحات مقاله انگلیسی | 15 صفحه |
هزینه | دانلود مقاله انگلیسی رایگان میباشد. |
پایگاه داده | نشریه الزویر |
نوع نگارش مقاله |
مقاله پژوهشی (Research Article) |
مقاله بیس | این مقاله بیس میباشد |
نمایه (index) | Scopus – Master Journals List – JCR |
نوع مقاله | ISI |
فرمت مقاله انگلیسی | |
ایمپکت فاکتور(IF) |
7.760 در سال 2019 |
شاخص H_index | 154 در سال 2020 |
شاخص SJR | 4.835 در سال 2019 |
شناسه ISSN | 0883-9026 |
شاخص Quartile (چارک) | Q1 در سال 2019 |
مدل مفهومی | ندارد |
پرسشنامه | ندارد |
متغیر | دارد |
رفرنس | دارد |
رشته های مرتبط | اقتصاد، مدیریت |
گرایش های مرتبط | اقتصاد نظری، کارآفرینی |
نوع ارائه مقاله |
ژورنال |
مجله | مجله سرمایه گذاری کسب و کار – Journal of Business Venturing |
دانشگاه | Hanken School of Economics, Kirjastonkatu 16, 65100 Vaasa, Finland |
کلمات کلیدی | بهره وری کارآفرینی، کارآفرینی مبتنی بر فرصت، کارآفرینی مبتنی بر ضرورت، اقتصاد غیررسمی، نهادهای نظارتی، ناسازگاری نهادی |
کلمات کلیدی انگلیسی | Entrepreneurship productivity، Opportunity-driven entrepreneurship، Necessity-driven entrepreneurship، Informal economy، Regulative institutions، Institutional incongruence |
شناسه دیجیتال – doi |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2020.106002 |
کد محصول | E14602 |
وضعیت ترجمه مقاله | ترجمه آماده این مقاله موجود نمیباشد. میتوانید از طریق دکمه پایین سفارش دهید. |
دانلود رایگان مقاله | دانلود رایگان مقاله انگلیسی |
سفارش ترجمه این مقاله | سفارش ترجمه این مقاله |
فهرست مطالب مقاله: |
Abstract 1. Executive summary 2. Introduction 3. Theory and hypotheses 4. Research methods 5. Results 6. Discussion CRediT authorship contribution statement Declaration of competing interest Acknowledgements Appendix A. Supplementary data References |
بخشی از متن مقاله: |
Abstract
Developing the concept of institutional incongruence and employing panel data from 60 countries, we outline an alternative view of the informal economy and the effects of regulative institutions on entrepreneurship productivity. We find evidence that the informal economy’s size is, largely, negatively associated with entrepreneurship productivity, and that in the presence of a large informal economy, governmental efforts to improve governance quality can be counterproductive. Our results suggest policy interventions aimed at changing institutions to practice formal entrepreneurship should be implemented cautiously to avoid inducing institutional incongruence. Executive summary Although the informal economy constitutes a considerable percentage of business activity around the world, its effects on entrepreneurship have received little research attention (Bruton et al., 2012). As governments in countries with large informal economies attempt to develop their regulative institutions constraining informal business activities, it is important to understand the potential effects on entrepreneurship productivity. Entrepreneurship productivity captures conditions that can lead to entrepreneurship-driven structural transformation and economic growth. Our study provides insights on how the informal economy’s institutional conditions and formal regulation interact to influence entrepreneurship productivity. We focus on the informal economy’s size and extent of regulation, in the form of governance quality. Our cross-country analysis finds the informal economy’s size, reflecting the cognitive and normative institutions of informal business practice, is in most cases negatively associated with entrepreneurship productivity in terms of the ratio of opportunity-to-necessity entrepreneurship. Moreover, we find support for our claim that improving governance quality decreases entrepreneurship productivity when cognitive and normative institutions accept informal business activities. This challenges the literature that argues for developing regulative institutions (e.g., Aparicio et al., 2016). Instead, we find support for an alternative view suggesting the effects of improving regulative institutions on entrepreneurship depend on the state of informal institutions in the country (Kim & Li, 2014a). |