Transcript in 2007

Entrepreneurial activity in Russia in crossnational comparison:
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (20062007)
Prof. Dr. Alexander Chepurenko
Mrs. Olga Obraztsova, PhD (Ec.)
State University – Higher School of Economics (HSE)
Main Points of the Paper
• 1. GEM methodology and main indicators
(more details at: www.gemconsortium.org)
• 2. GEM APS results for Russia in 2006 and
2007
• 3. Cross-national comparison of GEM
countries (2006-2007)
• 4. Some evidences
1. GEM methodology and
main indicators
1. GEM methodology and main indicators
• Following to Kirzner (1973, 1979), GEM views
entrepreneurship as an aspect of human action in which
all individual-based acts of arbitrage are, to various
degrees, expressions of entrepreneurial attitudes of actors
• Entrepreneurship: ‘any attempt to create a new venture,
including self-employment, undertaken by an individual
or a group of individuals’
• Tools: (1) Adult population survey (representative for the
respective country, confidence interval - 5 %), (2)
Experts’ standardized survey, (3) Experts’ in-depth
interviews, (4) secondary statistics (WB ‘Doing
Business” etc.)
• APS: in Russia – conducted by the HSE, N= 1894
(2006), 1936 (2007)
The GEM Model of Explaining
Entrepreneurship
General
National
Framework
Conditions
Social,
Cultural,
Political
Context
Major
Established
Firms
(Primary
Economy)
Micro, Small and
Medium Firms
(Secondary
Economy)
Entrepreneuri
al
Framework
Conditions
Entrepreneuri
al
Opportunities
Entrepreneurial
Capacity
•Skills
•Motivation
New
Establishme
nts
National Economic
Growth
(Jobs and
Technical
Innovation)
New Firms
Ladder of entrepreneurial activity
Entrepreneurial
potential of a society
Potential entrepreneurs (willing
to start-up)
Nascent entrepreneurs (practical
steps to start-up)
Latent entrepreneurs (no incomes
or salaries from the business after
start-up) 0-3 months
Established business owners – over
42 months (regular business based
incomes enabling to maintain it)
Early stage entrepreneurship (0
– 42 months)
New, or baby business owners (3-42
months)
Start-ups (already obtained first
incomes from business) 0-3
months
Most important GEM indicators
Total Entrepreneurial Activity index (ТЕА) –
share of adult population (18 to 64 aged), taking
part at a start-up or being owners/managers of
firma younger than 42 months;
Established business ownership rate (EBO)
• Percentage of 18-64 population who are currently
an owner-manager of an established business,
i.e., owning and managing a running business
that has paid salaries, wages, or any other
payments to the owners for more than 42 months.
2. GEM APS results for
Russia in 2006 and 2007
TEA Russia: Age and Motivation Structure, 2006-2007
(%)
Age
Motivation
Opportunity
driven
Necessity driven
Total
Mixed
2006
2007
2006
2007
2006
2007
2006
2007
18-24
66,7
75
16,7
5
16,7
20
100
100
25-34
59,5
58,6
27
27,6
13,5
13,8
100
100
35-44
37,5
57
40,6
23,8
21,9
19
100
100
45 and
older
33,3
47,6
57,1
38,1
9,5
14,3
100
100
Total
49,1
59,3
35,2
24,2
15,7
16,5
100
100
Russia: Indicators of entrepreneurial activity in 2006-2007 as for
stages and gender (% of adult population)
Index
Potential
entrepreneurs
Nascent
New business
owners
Established
business
owners
2006
2007
2006
2007
2006
2007
2006
2007
Male
19,7
13,7
3,6
2,2
3,0
1,5
1,9
1,2
Female
12,4
6,5
1,6
0,6
0,7
0,7
0,8
1,7
Total
15,2
9,2
2,4
1,2
1,6
1
1,2
1,5
3. Cross-national comparison
of GEM countries (20062007)
2 possible attempts to countries
comparison
• 1. Modeling of groups based on expert
evaluation of socio-economic, historical,
mental similarities
• 2. Using of formalized procedures
(clustering).
• Both attempts have its advantages…
Indicators of some GEM countries in 2006
Count early
ry
TEA
established
male
female EBO
male
early
discon
tinued
female necess opport
ity
unity
0,61
1,44
3,39
Russia
4,86
7,33
2,57
1,19
1,83
Hunga
ry
Latvia
6,04
8,09
4,05
6,72
9,03
4,48
1,33
4,64
1,13
6,57
9,41
3,92
5,69
8,12
3,41
1,04
5,05
1,98
Croati
8,58
a
Sloven 4,63
ia
PR
16,19
China
India
10,42
12,35
4,87
4,12
5,8
2,46
3,81
4,41
1,81
6,93
2,29
4,44
6,42
2,44
0,47
4,05
1,02
18,46
13,79
8,98
11,56
6,26
6,27
9,59
6,18
11,6
9,16
5,6
7,26
3,84
2,86
6,71
15,02
Brazil
13,74
9,61
12,09
14,77
9,45
5,55
5,99
4,55
11,65
1,27
TEA and GDP per capita compared, GEM 2006
Clusters of GEM participating countries
on the basis of TEA 2006
• First step: 6 countries’ clusters - according
to Sturges’ rule (see following slide)
• 2nd step: iterative optimization of the
contingent of the groups, seeking k-value
(K-mean), which yields a step-like increase
in the maximal inter-group dispersion (on
aggregate). As a result…
Clustering of GEM countries by entrepreneurial
activity
Clusters
6
TEA06
4,79 а
EB06
3,18
TEA07
2,36 b
EB07
1,40
5
4
3
9,40
15,69
19,86
6,64 c
9,51
12,25
7,27
12,21
16,75
5,27 d
9,02
13,31
2
1
Mean
Russia
22,48
40,15
9,47
4,86
20,38
26,74
6,9
1,19
22,72
28,39
9,35
2,67
15,25
20,91
6,69
1,68
a ТЕА06 priority group.
b ТЕА07 priority group.
c ЕВ06 priority group.
d ЕВ07 priority group
Example: TEA-Clustering (in 2007)
4. Some evidences (2006)
• Russia belongs to the center (at a distance of 0.07) of the cluster
6 of 18 most typical countries with below-average levels of TEA,
• Other countries of this cluster - the ‘old Europeans’ like U.K.,
Belgium, Denmark, Switzerland etc. as well as some transitional
countries (Croatia, Latvia, Hungary, Romania), and Brazil,
• Among the so-called BRIC – Brazil and Russia have belowaverage levels of early-stage entrepreneurial activity, whereas
• China belongs to an ‘advanced middle’ cluster 4 (like
Netherlands, USA, Sweden) and
• India - to an even more prospecting small cluster 3 (together
with Ireland) with high TEA Index rates
• Argentina
4. Some evidences (2006)
• No statistically significant dependence of both
TEA and EBO from per capita GDP
• Statistically relevant correlation between all
groups of early entrepreneurs and the GDP
deflator index (Spearman's Rank Correlation
Coefficient - 0,613 by 5%) .
4. Some evidences: TEA and GDP
• Statistical analysis of TEA compared with per
capita GDP support a non-linear relationship (the
regression parameters are significant at a
confidence level of 0.95)
• In countries with high levels of necessity
entrepreneurship, there is no direct positive
correlation between TEA and per capita GDP
• In countries with higher levels of opportunity
entrepreneurship there are higher levels of
economic development
4. Some evidences: EBO and GDP
• No support for the dependence of established
entrepreneurship on per capita GDP as an aggregate
indicator of socio-economic conditions.
• H: it is not the aggregate indicator of established
businesses, but rather the structure important: the higher
the share of opportunity entrepreneurship - the higher the
possibility to belong into clusters with high levels of
economic development.
• Non-linear dependence of EBO-index levels on per
capita GDP was not supported (with an R2 of 0.114, the
null hypothesis was not rejected to a significance level of
5%).
Thank you for attention!
• For more details see: O. Obraztsova, A.
Chepurenko, The Development of Russian
Private Entrepreneurship in Cross-Country
Comparison, in: Voprosy economiki, 2008,
No. 8, p. 91-107 (www.vopreco.ru) - in
Russian