GEM Research

1. GEM Research Niels Bosma GEM Annual Meeting 2012

2. The GEM consortium: a collection of enthusiastic academics building unique datasets Monitoring entrepreneurship worldwide since 1999 Data publicly available, standardized procedures Increasing number of participating countries Increasing number of academic publications However GEM cannot answer all questions – although sometimes there seems to be an expectation that it should Some questions should simply not be answered using GEM data Many GEM members have limited time available for academic research The following slides are based on Amorós, Bosma and Levie (2012) and… Highlight the academic contribution of GEM to the research field Identify particular areas that GEM data can be used in the near future Call for more research collaborations to make the step to the next level GEM Research and the Academic Community

3. Strengths: Cross-national (and regional) comparisons Focus on individuals, allowing to discern Types and phases of entrepreneurship Entrepreneurial attitudes, activity and aspirations Growing dataset allows more sophisticated empirical analysis Limitations Cross-sectional data (unlike e.g. PSED) Limited sample of entrepreneurs within countries – notable exceptions: Spain, United Kingdom, Chile, Germany Simple structure of the surveys is needed for cross-national comparison but makes it more difficult to provide adequate measures of particular theoretical constructs. GEM APS Methodology and its strengths and limitations for entrepreneurship research

4. To measure differences in the level of entrepreneurial activity among countries To uncover factors determining national levels of entrepreneurial activity To identify policies that lead to appropriate national levels of entrepreneurial activity Achieving the three GEM objectives would help establish how entrepreneurship relates to economic growth and well-being. The GEM Objectives

5. Waves of GEM-based research over time • First wave: country studies, country comparisons, determinants of (early-stage) entrepreneurial activity. • National comparisons of nascent entrepreneurship and early-stage entrepreneurial activity (GEM’s 1st objective). • First linkages with growth although time dimension is limited • Second wave: data based on more years of observations, combining GEM with other datasets • More knowledge on determinants of (types and phases of) entrepreneurship (GEM’s 2nd objective) • Third wave: increasing number of time observations, variance of countries, more advanced methods • Grasping policy effects increasingly possible (GEM’s 3rd objective) • More information on developing and emerging countries • Allows more reliable links with economic development • Regional differentiation

6. Theoretical perspectives adopted in the papers Solow/Romer growth theories, Human capital theory, psychology and sociology, Network theory, human capital theory, Network theory, agglomeration theory, regional growth theory, Schumpeter Mark I and II, structural transformation, stages of economic development, Stages of economic development, managed vs. entrepreneurial economies, Endogenous theory of economic growth, new economic geography, Social psychological theory of planned action , Economic theory on household portfolios, Human capital theory, Labour economists, social psychology and sociology, Internalization theory, knowledge spillovers, Occupational choice literature, migration theory, Eclectic framework of entrepreneurship, Industrial organization, pecking order theory, Labour economics, displacement theory, Entrepreneurship, psychology and sociology, Opportunity recognition, growth theory, Pecking order theory, finance gap literature, transition economies, Opportunity recognition, Stages of economic development, institutions, Opportunity recognition , creative destruction, productive entrepreneurship, Knowledge spillovers, absorptive capacity, stages of economic development, institutions, Institutional theory, entrepreneurial motivation, Institutional theory, Behavioural Economics, Institutional theory, Political economics, strategic management, Social capital theory, Kirznerian´s opportunity perception. Source: Amoros, Bosma & Levie (forthcoming)

7. From macro environment to micro-level decisions: a multilevel phenomenon – should be acknowledged in research methodology What has been investigated to date (macro-micro & macro-macro)? Some examples The importance of perceptions (e.g. Arenius and Minniti 2005) Characteristics of types of entrepreneurs (e.g. Koellinger 2009) Characteristics along the entrepreneurial process (Brixy et al. 2011) Gender studies (e.g. Verheul et al. 2006; Langowitz & Minniti 2007; Wagner 2007) Clusters (Rocha and Sternberg 2007) Role of Economic development (Wennekers et al. 2005) Culture / Social Norms (Kwon and Arenius 2010; Stephan and Uhlaner 2010) Intellectual Property Rights (Autio and Acs 2010) Financial and Educational systems, (DeClercq et al 2011) Investigating Determinants of Entrepreneurship

8. Wennekers et al (2010): overview article – stress importance of discerning types of entrepreneurship Some other GEM-based output: Wong et al (2005); Van Stel et al. (2005); Acs and Varga (2005); Acs and Amoros (2008); Valiere and Peterson (2009); Hessels and Van Stel (2009); Bosma (2011) After a decade of data collection, a business cycle with ups and downs, GEM arrives at a point where breakthrough papers can be anticipated However, better supporting theoretical models are required. Linking Entrepreneurship to Economic Development

9. GEM-based publications in selected entrepreneurship journals, 2005-2010 • Small Business Economics (30) • Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice (4) • Journal of Busines Venturing (3) • Entrepreneurship and Regional Development (3) • International Small Business Journal (4) • Journal of International Business Studies (2) • Strategic Entreprenership Journal (1) • Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship (2)

10. GEM-Based articles: what have we learned • Small Business Economics’ three special issue have been important for GEM • Reynolds et al (2005) article: now already in top 5 cited articles of the journal – GEM certainly increasingly recognized • Investigating determinants of entrepreneurship • Uneven coverage • Using both NES and secondary sources • NES data used a.o. in two JIBS and one ETP publication • Linking entrepreneurship to growth: sufficient attention but no clear-cut evidence yet…. • So far relatively limited attention is paid to explaining • Entrepreneurial perceptions, start-up intentions • owner-managers of (types of) established businesses • business discontinuations and reasons of exit • informal investment

11. Entrepreneurship and Development Entrepreneurship and the Business Cycle Baumol’s ‘E-constant’ proposition Adopting advanced methods Further regional analysis … Some research areas where GEM data could be used well

12. Findings to date still rather limited Naudé and colleagues from UNU-Wider do some interesting work (e.g. Naudé et al. 2008; Gries and Naudé 2008) GEM increasingly equipped for tackling this issue GEM Model: different conditions required in different stages of economic development Evidence for transition countries (Aidis et al. 2008; Acs and Amoros 2008; Valliere and Peterson 2009) Number of developing/transition countries participating in GEM is increasing rapidly  more opportunities (also for ‘development’ journals) The Role of Entrepreneurship in Developing Countries

13. Baumol (1990): number of individuals with entrepreneurial behavior is similar across countries, but set of rules and norms decide how this behavior is channeled (productive-unproductive-destructive) Implications for national entrepreneurship rates GEM confirms a wide variety in entrepreneurial prevalence rates However, TEA (and established business ownership) is not all there is; examples of additional types of entrepreneurial activity include Entrepreneurial Employee Activity Social Entrepreneurship Emphasizing the role of institutions for the quality of entrepreneurship; examples: IPR protection (Autio & Acs 2010) Education & Training (Levie and Autio 2007; Bowen & DeClercq 2008; DeClercq et al 2011) Social security / job protection /unemployment benefits (Van Stel et al 2008; Bosma 2009; koellinger & Minniti 2009) Regulatory and legal regimes (Levie and Autio 2011) Baumol’s Proposition and GEM Evidence

14. Methodologies: highlighting two techniques particularly appropriate to GEM • Panel Data Analysis • For country x time analysis  GMM techniques appropriate if number of years is limited (Arrelano & Bond 1998) • Applications: impact (types and phases of) entrepreneurship on growth, analysis impact EFC’s on entrepreneurship • Multilevel Analysis • Acknowledges that individuals in groups/regions/country do not act independently from each other – random intercepts for groups/regions/countries • Allows effects of “lower level units” to vary across “higher level units” – random slopes. E.g. The effect of the individual’s education level on involvement in nascent entrepreneurship differs across countries (with specific characteristics)

15. Call for more collaborations • Many GEM National Team members lack the time for writing academic papers • Plenty opportunities to form research partnerships • Learn from existing work and most recent papers. See new GEM working paper series • More emphasis on theoretical sections, GEM-based empirical analysis remains an application • Work together on theoretical underpinnings

16. Institutionalizing GEM Research Development • Role of the Research Committee • Past years’ • 2005-2008: focus on data quality issues • 2009-2011: simplify APS (modular) structure, implementation of special topics, improve documentation • 2012+ : fly out!  focus on academic advances • Lots of great ideas (work group yesterday) • Resources now available • Recognition from the GERA board • Requires rethinking of the Research Committe’s role

17. Formalizing the GEM Research Committee • Ensure stability and dynamics • Propose to have a fresh start in 2012 • Those interested to serve may apply • Give resume • Make your ideas known • Invitations will be emailed shortly • Current members need to re-apply • A committee will be installed to assign the new RC committee; diversity preferred • Members, in principle, serve for three years • One leader from GERA, one assigned board member

18. Thanks to members of the past years! First tier (regular meetings): • Ernesto Amoros (Chile), Erkko Autio (UK), Alicia Coduras (Spain), Ehud Menipaz (Israel), Nezam Faghih (Iran), Thomas Schøtt (Denmark), Yana Litovsky, Jeff Seaman The second tier (those occasionally consulted): • Zoltan Acs (Hungary), Pia Arenius (Finland), Girjanauth Boodraj (Jamaica), Gianni Chocce (Chile), Esra Karadeniz (Turkey), Virginia Lasio (Ecuador), Jonathan Levie (UK), Maria Minniti (Co-ordination), Olga Obraztsova (Russia), Joseph Onochie (US), Rolf Sternberg (Germany), Hugh Thomas (Hong Kong), Sander Wennekers (Netherlands)

19. GEM Working Paper Series • http://logec.repec.org/scripts/seriesstat.pf?item=repec:gem:wpaper

20. GEM Spain – International Research Workshop • San Sebastian-Donostia, Spain, next July 19th • Special focus on Entrepreneurial Employee Activity / Intrapreneurship

21. IDRC – Networks Research Collaboration