Advertisement

Empirical Economics

, Volume 56, Issue 6, pp 2225–2252 | Cite as

A replication of ‘Entry regulation and entrepreneurship: a natural experiment in German craftsmanship’

  • Petrik RunstEmail author
  • Jörg Thomä
  • Katarzyna Haverkamp
  • Klaus Müller
Replication studies

Abstract

Rostam-Afschar (Empir Econ 47:1067–1101, 2014) analyzes the impact of the deregulation of the German Trade and Crafts Code of 2004 on entrepreneurial activity, using German microcensus (MC) data. He finds a uniform positive effect on market entry in partially and fully deregulated trades and no change in exit probabilities. We replicate and extend this study. Most importantly, we generate a novel classification scheme that aims to achieve an improved identification of crafts trades in the microcensus. It is necessary to remove non-craftsmen from the analysis as the policy change exclusively pertains to the crafts sector. In contrast to Rostam-Afschar’s findings, the increase in self-employment and entry is more pronounced in the completely deregulated B1-trades rather than the partially deregulated A-trades. In addition, exit probabilities in fully deregulated trades do not remain constant but rather increase.

Keywords

Entrepreneurship Regulation Craftsmanship Replication Microcensus 

JEL Classification

L51 J24 I28 M13 

References

  1. Aretz B, Arntz M, Gregory T (2013) The minimum wage affects them all: evidence of employment spillovers in the roofing sector. Ger Econ Rev 14(3):282–315CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. BAA (2014) Methodenbericht—Spezifische Berufsaggregate auf Grundlage der Klassifikation der Berufe 2010. Bundesagentur für Arbeit. http://statistik.arbeitsagentur.de/
  3. Baron RM, Kenny DA (1986) The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol 51(6):1173–1182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. BiBB (2012) Zuordnungsliste von dualen Ausbildungsberufen nach BBiG/HwO ggf. inklusive Vorgänger und den zugeordneten Erhebungsberufen der BerufsbildungsstatistikGoogle Scholar
  5. Branstetter L, Lima F, Taylor LJ, Venancio A (2014) Do entry regulations deter entrepreneurship and job creation? Evidence from recent reforms in Portugal. Econ J 124(577):805–832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bruhn M (2011) License to sell: the effect of business registration reform on entrepreneurial activity in Mexico. Rev Econ Stat 93(1):382–386CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Ciccone A, Papaioannou E (2007) Red tape and delayed entry. J Eur Econ Assoc 5(2–3):444–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Djankov S (2008) A response to is doing business damaging business? Working paper, World BankGoogle Scholar
  9. Djankov S, La Porta R, Lopez-de-Silanes F, Shleifer A (2002) The regulation of entry. Quart J Econ 117(1):1–37CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Feuerhake J (2012) Handwerkszählung 2008. Wirtschaft und Statistik 1:51–62Google Scholar
  11. Fisman R, Sarria-Allende V (2010) Regulation of entry and the distortion of industrial organization. J Appl Econ 13(1):91–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Heckman J, Pinto R (2015) Econometric mediation analyses: identifying the sources of treatment effects from ecperiementally estimated production technologies with unmeasured and mismeasured inputs. Econ Rev 34(1–2):6–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Imai K, Keele L, Yamamoto T (2010) Identification, inference and sensitivity analysis for causal mediation effects. Stat Sci 25(1):51–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Judd CM, Kenny DA (1981) Process analysis: estimating mediation in treatment evaluations. Eval Rev 5(5):602–619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. MacKinnon DP, Fairchild AJ, Fritz MS (2007) Mediation analysis. Annu Rev Psychol 58(1):593–614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Müller K (2006) Erste Auswirkungen der Novellierung der Handwerksordnung von 2004. In: Bizer K (ed). Göttinger Handwerkswirtschaftliche Studien, 74, DuderstadtGoogle Scholar
  17. Müller K (2014) Stabilität und Ausbildungsbereitschaft von Existenzgründungen im Handwerk. In: Bizer K (ed) Göttinger Handwerkswirtschaftliche Studien, 94, DuderstadtGoogle Scholar
  18. Müller K (2016a) Handwerksrechtsnovelle von 2003. Was waren die Ergebnisse? Gewerbearchiv 2(216):54–59Google Scholar
  19. Müller K (2016b) Economic effects of deregulation: using the example of the revised Trade and Crafts Code 2004. ifh working papers No. 5, Institute for Small Business Economics (ifh), University of GöttingenGoogle Scholar
  20. Pigou AC (1938) The economics of welfare. Macmillan and Co, LondonGoogle Scholar
  21. Posner RA (1975) The social costs of monopoly and regulation. J Polit Econ 83(4):807–828CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Rostam-Afschar D (2010) Entry regulation and entrepreneurship. Empirical evidence from a German natural experiment. DIW discussion papers 1065Google Scholar
  23. Rostam-Afschar D (2014) Entry regulation and entrepreneurship: a natural experiment in German craftsmanship. Empir Econ 47:1067–1101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Stigler GJ (1971) The theory of economic regulation. Bell J Econ Manag Sci 2(1):3–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tullock G (1967) The welfare costs of tariffs, monopolies, and theft. West Econ J 5(3):224–232Google Scholar
  26. Yakovlev E, Zhuravskaya A (2013) The unequal enforcement of liberalization: evidence from Russias’s reform of business regulation. J Eur Econ Assoc 11(4):808–838CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Petrik Runst
    • 1
    Email author
  • Jörg Thomä
    • 1
  • Katarzyna Haverkamp
    • 1
  • Klaus Müller
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute for Small Business Economics (ifh)University of GöttingenGöttingenGermany

Personalised recommendations