Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

R&D transfer, policy and innovative ambitious entrepreneurship: evidence from Latin American countries

  • Published:
The Journal of Technology Transfer Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In this article, we explore the effectiveness of government intervention, R&D, and pro-innovation mechanisms in the likelihood of being an innovative entrepreneur with high ambitions of growing, in the particular context of Latin America and the Caribbean. We use a longitudinal approach, with a multilevel mixed-effects logistic regression procedure. The data comes mainly from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and the Global Competitiveness Index. The sample covers 14 countries from Latin America and the Caribbean between 2006 and 2015. The results provide empirical insights about firm and individual characteristics that explain the likelihood of being an innovative and ambitious entrepreneur. We also find that effective and narrowed policies in addition to an innovation-driven environment, also increases innovative-ambitious entrepreneurs. The paper includes implications for policy makers that want to enhance local entrepreneurial framework conditions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. This index is based on the life cycle of the entrepreneurial process, which is divided into two periods: the first covers nascent entrepreneurs who have undertaken some action to create a new business in the past year but have not paid any salaries or wages in the last 3 months, and the second includes owners/managers of businesses that have paid wages and salaries for more than 3 months but less than 42 months (Bosma et al. 2009).

  2. The opportunity-based entrepreneurs are defined by the criteria established by GEM methodology according to which they perceive themselves as “I´m in this start-up to take advantage of a business opportunity”.

  3. The NES is similar to other surveys that capture expert judgments to evaluate specific national conditions. For example, the WEF´s GCI uses similar surveys to construct its indices (Sala-i-Martin et al. 2010). For more details about NES methodology see www.gemconsortium.org.

  4. VIF values not reported, but available upon request.

References

  • Acs, Z., & Amorós, J. E. (2008). Entrepreneurship and competitive dynamics in Latin America. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 305–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., Astebro, T., Audretsch, D., & Robinson, D. T. (2016). Public policy to promote entrepreneurship: A call to arms. Small Business Economics, 47(1), 35–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Acs, Z., Desai, S., & Hessels, J. (2008). Entrepreneurship, economic development and institutions. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 219–234.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amorós, J. E., Borraz, F., & Veiga, L. (2016a). Entrepreneurship and socioeconomic indicators in Latin America. Latin American Research Review, 51(4), 186–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amorós, J. E., Ciravegna, L., Mandakovic, V., & Stenholm, P. (2017). Necessity or opportunity? The effects of state fragility and economic development on entrepreneurial efforts. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. https://doi.org/10.1177/1042258717736857.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amorós, J. E., Etchebarne, M. S., Torres-Zapata, I., & Felzensztein, C. (2016b). International entrepreneurial firms in Chile: An exploratory profile. Journal of Business Research, 69(6), 2052–2060.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Amorós, J. E., Fernández, C., & Tapia, J. (2012). Quantifying the relationship between entrepreneurship and competitiveness development stages in Latin America. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(3), 249–270.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aparicio, S., Urbano, D., & Audretsch, D. (2016). Institutional factors, opportunity entrepreneurship and economic growth: Panel data evidence. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 45–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Arenius, P., & Minniti, M. (2005). Perceptual variables and nascent entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 233–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D., & Caiazza, R. (2016). Technology transfer and entrepreneurship: Cross-national analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(6), 1247–1259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., Carree, M. A., & Thurik, A. R. (2001). Does entrepreneurship reduce unemployment? (No. 01-074/3). Tinbergen Institute discussion paper.

  • Audretsch, D. B., Carree, M. A., Van Stel, A. J., & Thurik, A. R. (2002). Impeded industrial restructuring: the growth penalty. Kyklos, 55(1), 81–98.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Thurik, A. R. (2001). What’s new about the new economy? Sources of growth in the managed and entrepreneurial economies. Industrial and Corporate Change, 10(1), 267–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch, D. B., & Thurik, A. R. (2004). A model of the entrepreneurial economy (No. 1204). Papers on entrepreneurship, growth and public policy.

  • Autio, E. (2005). Creative tension: The significance of Ben Oviatt’s and Patricia McDougall’s article ‘toward a theory of international new ventures’. Journal of International Business Studies, 36(1), 9–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E. (2007). Global entrepreneurship monitor: 2007 global report on high-growth entrepreneurship. Babson Park: Babson College.

    Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., Kenney, M., Mustar, P., Siegel, D., & Wright, M. (2014). Entrepreneurial innovation: The importance of context. Research Policy, 43(7), 1097–1108.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Autio, E., Pathak, S., & Wennberg, K. (2013). Consequences of cultural practices for entrepreneurial behaviors. Journal of International Business Studies, 44(4), 334–362.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W. J. (1990). Entrepreneurship: Productive, unproductive, and destructive. Journal of Political Economy, 98(5), 893–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Birch, D. (1987). The job generating process. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bosma, N., Jones, K., Autio, E., & Levie, J. (2009). GEM executive report 2008. Babson College, Universidad del Desarrollo, and Global Entrepreneurship Research Consortium.

  • Bowen, H. P., & De Clercq, D. (2008). Institutional context and the allocation of entrepreneurial effort. Journal of International Business Studies, 39(4), 747–767.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H. L. (2010). Institutional theory and entrepreneurship: where are we now and where do we need to move in the future? Entrepreneurship theory and practice, 34(3), 421–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G. D., Ketchen, D. J., & Ireland, R. D. (2013). Entrepreneurship as a solution to poverty. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(6), 683–689.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Capelleras, J. L., & Rabetino, R. (2008). Individual, organizational and environmental determinants of new firm employment growth: evidence from Latin America. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4(1), 79–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carlsson, B. (1989). The evolution of manufacturing technology and its impact on industrial structure: an international study. Small Business Economics, 1(1), 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carree, M., Van Stel, A., Thurik, R., & Wennekers, S. (2002). Economic development and business ownership: an analysis using data of 23 OECD countries in the period 1976–1996. Small Business Economics, 19(3), 271–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carree, M. A., & Thurik, A. R. (2005). The impact of entrepreneurship on economic growth. In Handbook of entrepreneurship research (pp. 437–471).

  • Casson, M. (1995). Entrepreneurship and business culture; Studies in the economics of trust (Vol. 1). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dau, L. A., & Cuervo-Cazurra, A. (2014). To formalize or not to formalize: Entrepreneurship and pro-market institutions. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(5), 668–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • de Koning, A., & Snijders, J. (1992). Policy on small-and medium-sized enterprises in countries of the European Community. International Small Business Journal, 10(3), 25–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • De Soto, H. (1989). The other path (p. 17133). New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dimov, D. (2010). Nascent entrepreneurs and venture emergence: Opportunity confidence, human capital, and early planning. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1123–1153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Drucker, P. F. (2006). Innovation and entrepreneurship—Practice and principles. New York: Harper.

    Google Scholar 

  • Estrin, S., Korosteleva, J., & Mickiewicz, T. (2013). Which institutions encourage entrepreneurial growth aspirations? Journal of Business Venturing, 28(4), 564–580.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman, C. (1987). Technology policy and economic performance: Lessons from Japan. London: Pinter Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Golovko, E., & Valentini, G. (2011). Exploring the complementarity between innovation and export for SMEs’ growth. Journal of International Business Studies, 42(3), 362–380.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Grilo, I., & Thurik, R. (2005). Latent and actual entrepreneurship in Europe and the US: Some recent developments. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1(4), 441–459.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, D. A., Griffin, M. A., & Gavin, M. B. (2000). The application of hierarchical linear modeling to organizational research. In K. J. Klein & S. W. J. Kozlowski (Eds.), Multilevel theory, research, and methods in organizations: Foundations, extensions, and new directions (pp. 467–511). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kantis, H. (2005). The emergence of dynamic ventures in Latin America, Southern Europe and East Asia: An international comparison. International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 2(1), 34–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kantis, H., Angelelli, P., & Moori-Koenig, V. (2004). Experience in Latin America and Worldwide. Washington, DC: Inter-American Development Bank-Fundes International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kantis, H., Federico, J., Angelelli, P., & Ibarra-García, S. (2016). Business performance in Young Latin American Firms. In I.-A. D. Bank, M. Grazzi, & C. Pietrobelli (Eds.), Firm innovation and productivity in Latin America and the Caribbean: The engine of economic development (pp. 167–205). New York: Palgrave Macmillan US.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Kelley, D., Bosma, N. S., & Amorós, J. E. (2011). Global entrepreneurship monitor 2010 executive report. London: GERA.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kenney, M., & Patton, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial geographies: Support networks in three high-technology industries. Economic Geography, 81(2), 201–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, S. (1996). Entry, exit, growth, and innovation over the product life cycle. The American Economic Review, 86(3), 562–583.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klepper, S., & Simons, K. L. (2000). Dominance by birthright: entry of prior radio producers and competitive ramifications in the US television receiver industry. Strategic Management Journal, 21(10–11), 997–1016.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreiser, P. M., Marino, L. D., Kuratko, D. F., & Weaver, K. M. (2013). Disaggregating entrepreneurial orientation: The non-linear impact of innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking on SME performance. Small Business Economics, 40(2), 273–291.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kwon, S. W., & Arenius, P. (2010). Nations of entrepreneurs: A social capital perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 25(3), 315–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landström, H., Åström, F., & Harirchi, G. (2015). Innovation and entrepreneurship studies: One or two fields of research? International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 11(3), 493–509.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lederman, D., Messina, J., Pienknagura, S., & Rigolini, J. (2014). Latin American entrepreneurs: Many firms but little innovation. World Bank Latin American and Caribbean studies. Washington, DC: World Bank Group. Retrieved May 3, 2018 from http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/800041468015024160/Latin-American-entrepreneurs-many-firms-but-little-innovation.

  • Lehmann, E. E., & Seitz, N. (2017). Freedom and innovation: A country and state level analysis. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(5), 1009–1029.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levesque, M., & Minniti, M. (2006). The effect of aging on entrepreneurial behavior. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(2), 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levie, J., & Autio, E. (2008). A theoretical grounding and test of the GEM model. Small Business Economics, 31(3), 235–263.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Levie, J., & Autio, E. (2011). Regulatory burden, rule of law, and entry of strategic entrepreneurs: An international panel study. Journal of Management Studies, 48(6), 1392–1419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leyden, D. P. (2016). Public-sector entrepreneurship and the creation of a sustainable innovative economy. Small Business Economics, 46(4), 553–564.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Loveman, G., & Sengenberger, W. (1991). The re-emergence of small-scale production: An international comparison. Small Business Economics, 3(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 135–172.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Malerba, F., & McKelvey, M. (2018). Knowledge-intensive innovative entrepreneurship integrating Schumpeter, evolutionary economics, and innovation systems. Small Business Economics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-018-0060-2.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Martínez-Fierro, S., Biedma-Ferrer, J. M., & Ruiz-Navarro, J. (2016). Entrepreneurship and strategies for economic development. Small Business Economics, 47(4), 835–851.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mason, C., & Brown, R. (2013). Creating good public policy to support high-growth firms. Small Business Economics, 40(2), 211–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMullen, J. S., & Dimov, D. (2013). Time and the entrepreneurial journey: The problems and promise of studying entrepreneurship as a process. Journal of Management Studies, 50(8), 1481–1512.

    Google Scholar 

  • Messina, J., & Silva, J. (2017). Wage inequality in Latin America: understanding the past to prepare for the future (English). Latin American development forum series. Washington, D.C.: World Bank Group.

  • Minniti, M., Bygrave, W. D., & Autio, E. (2006). GEM global entrepreneurship monitor: 2005 executive report. London: London Bussiness School.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mrożewski, M., & Kratzer, J. (2017). Entrepreneurship and country-level innovation: Investigating the role of entrepreneurial opportunities. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 42(5), 1125–1142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • OECD. (1996). SMEs: employment, innovation and growth: The washington workshop. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pathak, S., Xavier-Oliveira, E., & Laplume, A. O. (2016). Technology use and availability in entrepreneurship: Informal economy as moderator of institutions in emerging economies. The Journal of Technology Transfer, 41(3), 506–529.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Piore, M. J., & Sabel, C. F. (1984). The second industrial divide: Possibilities for prosperity. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Poblete, C. (2018). Growth expectations through innovative entrepreneurship: The role of subjective values and duration of entrepreneurial experience. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 24(1), 191–213.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Porter, M., Sachs, J., & McArthur, J. (2001). Executive summary: Competitiveness and stages of economic development. The Global Competitiveness Report, 2002, 16–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rabe-Hesketh, S., & Skrondal, A. (2006). Multilevel modelling of complex survey data. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series A (Statistics in Society), 169(4), 805–827.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds, P., Bosma, N., Autio, E., Hunt, S., De Bono, N., Servais, I., et al. (2005). Global entrepreneurship monitor: Data collection design and implementation 1998–2003. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 205–231.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sala-i-Martin, X., Blanke, J. Drzeniek, Hanouz, M., Geiger, T., & Mia, I. (2010). The global competitiveness index 2010—2011: Looking beyond the global economic crisis. In K. Schwab (Ed.), The global competitiveness report 2010–2011 (pp. 3–55). Geneva: World Economic Forum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development: An inquiry into profits, capital, credit, interest, and the business cycle (Vol. 55). Piscataway: Transaction Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S. (2009). Why encouraging more people to become entrepreneurs is bad public policy. Small Business Economics, 33(2), 141–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shane, S., & Venkataraman, S. (2000). The promise of entrepreneurship as a field of research. Academy of Management Review, 25(1), 217–226.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sobel, R. S. (2008). Testing Baumol: Institutional quality and the productivity of entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 641–655.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stam, E. (2015). Entrepreneurial ecosystems and regional policy: A sympathetic critique. European Planning Studies, 23(9), 1759–1769.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stephan, U., Hart, M., and Drews, C.C. (2015a). Understanding motivations for entrepreneurship: a review of recent research evidence. Enterprise Research Centre and Aston Business School. Aston University, Birmingham. http://eprints.aston.ac.uk/25172/1/Understanding_motivations_for_entrepreneurship.pdf. Accessed April 21, 2017.

  • Stephan, U., Uhlaner, L. M., & Stride, C. (2015b). Institutions and social entrepreneurship: The role of institutional voids, institutional support, and institutional configurations. Journal of International Business Studies, 46(3), 308–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Storey, D. J. (1998). Six steps to heaven: Evaluating the impact of public policies to support small businesses in developed economies. Warwick Business School: Centre for Small and Medium Sized Enterprises.

    Google Scholar 

  • Storey, D. J. (2016). Understanding the small business sector (reedition). New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Thai, M. T. T., & Turkina, E. (2014). Macro-level determinants of formal entrepreneurship versus informal entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing, 29(4), 490–510.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Urbano, D., & Alvarez, C. (2014). Institutional dimensions and entrepreneurial activity: An international study. Small Business Economics, 42(4), 703–716.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Valdez, M. E., & Richardson, J. (2013). Institutional determinants of macro-level entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 37(5), 1149–1175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Van Stel, A., Carree, M., & Thurik, R. (2005). The effect of entrepreneurial activity on national economic growth. Small business economics, 24(3), 311–321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Verheul, I., Wennekers, S., Audretsch, D., & Thurik, R. (2002). An eclectic theory of entrepreneurship: policies, institutions and culture. In Entrepreneurship: Determinants and policy in a European-US comparison (pp. 11–81). Boston: Springer.

  • Wennekers, S., & Thurik, R. (1999). Linking entrepreneurship and economic growth. Small Business Economics, 13(1), 27–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., Davidsson, P., Audretsch, D. B., & Karlsson, C. (2011). The future of entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(1), 1–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Winter, S. G. (2006). Toward a neo-Schumpeterian theory of the firm. Industrial and Corporate Change, 15(1), 125–141.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Economic Forum. (2015). In C. Schwab (Ed.), The global competitiveness report 2015. Geneva: WEF.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. EGADE Business School, Tecnológico de Monterrey, Av. Carlos Lazo 100, Santa Fe, 01389, Mexico City, Mexico

    José Ernesto Amorós

  2. Universidad del Desarrollo, Santiago, Chile

    José Ernesto Amorós, Carlos Poblete & Vesna Mandakovic

Authors
  1. José Ernesto Amorós
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Carlos Poblete
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Vesna Mandakovic
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to José Ernesto Amorós.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Amorós, J.E., Poblete, C. & Mandakovic, V. R&D transfer, policy and innovative ambitious entrepreneurship: evidence from Latin American countries. J Technol Transf 44, 1396–1415 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09728-x

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10961-019-09728-x

Keywords

JEL Classification

Search

Navigation