Institutional dimensions and entrepreneurial activity: an international study

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine the influence of institutional dimensions (regulative, normative and cultural-cognitive) on the probability of becoming an entrepreneur. The main findings demonstrate, through logistic regression, that a favourable regulative dimension (fewer procedures to start a business), normative dimension (higher media attention for new business) and cultural-cognitive dimension (better entrepreneurial skills, less fear of business failure and better knowing of entrepreneurs) increase the probability of being an entrepreneur. Data were obtained from both the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and the International Institute for Management and Development for the year 2008, considering a sample of 30 countries and 36,525 individuals. The study advances the literature by providing new information on the environmental factors that affect entrepreneurial activity in the light of institutional economics. Also, the research could be useful for designing policies to foster entrepreneurship in different environments.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1

References

  1. Aidis, R., Estrin, S., & Mickiewicz, T. (2008). Institutions and entrepreneurship development in Russia: A comparative perspective. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 656–672.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Aldrich, H., & Fiol, C. M. (1994). Fools rush in? The institutional context of industry creation. Academy of Management Review, 19, 645–670.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Alvarez, C., & Urbano, D. (2011). Environmental factors and entrepreneurial activity in Latin America. Academia, Revista Latinoamericana de Administración, 48, 126–139.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Alvarez, C., & Urbano, D. (2012). Factores del entorno y creación de empresas: Un análisis institucional. Revista Venezolana de Gerencia, 57, 9–38.

    Google Scholar 

  5. 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 

  6. Anderson, A. R., Dodd, S. D., & Jack, S. L. (2012). Entrepreneurship as connecting: some implications for theorising and practice. Management Decision, 50(5), 958–971.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Audretsch, D. (2012). Entrepreneurship research. Management Decision, 50(5), 755–764.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Becker S., & Woessmann L. (2007). Was weber wrong? A human capital theory of protestant economic history. CESifo Working Paper No. 1987. Munich: CESifo.

  10. Begley, T., Tan, W. L., & Schoch, H. (2005). Politico-economic factors associated with interest in starting a business: A multi-country study. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 29(1), 35–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Blanchflower, D. G. (2004). Self-employment: More may not be better. NBER Working Paper No. 10286. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  12. 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 

  13. Bruton, G., & Ahlstromb, D. (2003). An institutional view of China’s venture capital industry. Explaining the differences between China and the West. Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 233–259.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Busenitz, L. W., & Lau, C. M. (1996). A cross-cultural cognitive model of new venture creation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 20(4), 25–39.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Busenitz, L. W, Gomez, C., & Spencer, J. W. (2000). Country institutional profiles: Unlocking entrepreneurial phenomena. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 994–1003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Collins, R. (1997). An Asian route to capitalism: Religious economy and the origins of self-transforming growth in Japan. American Sociological Review, 62, 843–865.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Commons. (1924). Legal foundations of capitalism. Wisconsin: University of Wisconsin Press. Reprint Madison.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dana, L. P. (1987). Evaluating policies promoting entrepreneurship—A cross cultural comparison of enterprises case study: Singapore & Malaysia. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 4(3), 36–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Dana, L. P. (1990). Saint Martin/Sint Maarten: a case study of the effects of culture on economic development. Journal of Small Business Management, 28(4), 91–98.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Davidsson, P. (1991). Continued entrepreneurship: ability, need and opportunity as determinants of small firm growth. Journal of Business Venturing, 6(6), 405–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Davidsson, P., & Honig, B. (2003). The role of social and human capital among nascent entrepreneurs. Journal of Business Venturing, 18(3), 301–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. De Clercq, D., Danis, W. D., & Dakhli, M. (2010). The moderating effect of institutional context on the relationship between associational activity and new business activity in emerging economies. International Business Review, 19(1), 85–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Delacroix, J., & Nielsen, F. (2001). The beloved myth: Protestantism and the rise of industrial capitalism in nineteenth-century Europe. Social Forces, 80(2), 509–553.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. DiMaggio, P. J., & Powell, W. W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), 147–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Djankov, S., La Porta, R., Lopez-De-Silanes, F., & Shleifer, A. (2002). The regulation of entry. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 117(1), 1–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Evans, D., & Leighton, L. (1989). Some empirical aspects of entrepreneurship. American Economic Review, 79, 519–535.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Gnyawali, D. R., & Fogel, D. S. (1994). Environments for entrepreneurship development: Key dimensions and research implications. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 18(4), 43–62.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gomez-Haro, S., Aragon-Correa, J. A., & Cordon-Pozo, E. (2011). Differentiating the effects of the institutional environment on corporate entrepreneurship. Management Decision, 49(10), 677–1693.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Gupta, V. K., Yayla, A. A., Sikdar, A., & Cha, M. S. (2012). Institutional environment for entrepreneurship: evidence from the developmental states of South Korea and United Arab Emirates. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 17(3), 1250013-1-1250013-21.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Hamilton, W. H. (1932). Institution. In E. R. A. Seligman & A. Johnson (Eds.), Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (Vol. 8, pp. 84–89). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Hayton, J. C., George, G., & Zahra, S. A. (2002). National culture and entrepreneurship: A review of behavioural research. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(4), 33–52.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Ho, Y., & Wong, P. (2007). Financing, regulatory costs and entrepreneurial propensity. Small Business Economics, 28, 187–204.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Hodgson, G. M. (2006). What are institutions? Journal of Economic Issues, XL(1), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences. Comparing values, behaviours, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). California: Sage Publications, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. (2005). Institutions and entrepreneurship. In S. A. Alvarez, R. Agarwal, & O. Sorenson (Eds.), Handbook of entrepreneurship research: Disciplinary perspectives (pp. 179–210). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  36. Kirzner, I. M. (1973). Competition and entrepreneurship. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

  37. Klapper, L., Laeven, L., & Rajan, R. (2006). Entry regulation as a barrier to entrepreneurship. Journal of Financial Economics, 82, 591–629.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Kostova, T. (1997): Country Institutional profiles: concept and measurement. Academy of Management Proceedings, 180–184.

  39. Langowitz, N., & Minniti, M. (2007). The entrepreneurial propensity of women. Entrepreneurship Theory & Practice, 31(3), 341–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Lee, S. M., Lim, S. B., & Pathak, R. D. (2011). Culture and entrepreneurial orientation: A multi-country study. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 7(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Liñán, F., Urbano, D., & Guerrero, M. (2011). Regional variations in entrepreneurial cognitions: Start-up intentions of university students in Spain. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development, 23(3–4), 187–215.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Manolova, T. S., Eunni, R. V., & Gyoshev, B. S. (2008). Institutional environments for entrepreneurship: Evidence from emerging economies in Eastern Europe. Entrepreneurship: Theory and Practice, 32(1), 203–218.

    Google Scholar 

  44. March, J. (1981). Decisions in organizations and theories of choice. In A. van de Ven & W. Joyce (Eds.), Perspectives on organizational design and behavior (pp. 205–244). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Markus, H., & Zajonc, R. B. (1985). The cognitive perspective in social psychology. In G. Lindzey & E. Aronson (Eds.), Handbook of social psychology (3rd ed., pp. 137–230). New York: Random House.

    Google Scholar 

  46. McClelland, D. (1961). The achieving society. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Mueller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2000). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: A nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 51–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Neale, W. C. (1987). Institutions. Journal of Economic Issues, 21(3), 1177–1206.

    Google Scholar 

  49. Nielsen, S. L., & Lassen, A. H. (2012). Images of entrepreneurship: towards a new categorization of entrepreneurship. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 8(1), 35–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. North, D. C. (1990). Institutions, institutional change and economic performance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  51. North, D. C. (2005). Understanding the process of economic change. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  52. Parsons, T. (1990). Prolegomena to a theory of social institutions. American Sociological Review, 55, 318–333.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Renko, M., Shrader, R. C., & Simon, M. (2012). Perception of entrepreneurial opportunity: A general framework. Management Decision, 50(7), 1233–1251.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  54. Reynolds, P. D., Hay, M., & Camp, S. (1999). Global entrepreneurship monitor: 1999 executive report. Kansas City, MO: Kauffman Foundation.

  55. Reynolds, P. D., Hay, M., Bygrave, W. D., Camp, S. M., & Autio, E. (2000). Global entrepreneurship monitor: 2000 executive report. Kansas City: Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership.

  56. Reynolds, P., Camp, S., Bygrave, W., Autio, E., & Hay, M. (2001). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. 2001 Executive Report. Babson College, London Business School, Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership.

  57. Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  58. Scott, W. R. (2001). Institutions and organizations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Scott, W.R. (2008). Institutions and organizations: ideas and interests (3rd ed.). Foundations for Organizational Science Series. Sage Publications.

  60. Selznick, P. (1957). Leadership in administration. New York: Harper & Row.

    Google Scholar 

  61. Shane, S. (1993). Cultural influences on national rates of innovation. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(1), 59–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  62. Shane, S. (2000). Prior knowledge and the discovery of entrepreneurial opportunities. Organization Science, 11(4), 448–469.

    Google Scholar 

  63. Shane, S., & Kolvereid, L. (1995). National environment, strategy, and new venture performance: A three country study. Journal of Small Business Management, 33(2), 37–50.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. In C. Kent, L. Sexton, & K. Vesper (Eds.), Encylopedia of entrepreneurship (pp. 72–90). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Spencer, J., & Gomez, C. (2004). The relationship among national institutional structures, economic factors, and domestic entrepreneurial activity: A multicountry study. Journal of Business Research, 57, 1098–1107.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Stenholm, P., Acs, Z. J., & Wuebker, R. (2013). Exploring country-level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity. Journal of Business Venturing, 28, 176–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Stephen, F., Urbano, D., & van Hemmen, S. (2009). The responsiveness of entrepreneurs to working time regulations. Small Business Economics, 32(3), 259–276.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Thornton, P., Ribeiro-Soriano, D., & Urbano, D. (2011). Socio-cultural factors and entrepreneurial activity: An overview. International Small Business Journal, 29(2), 1–14.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  69. van Gelderen, M., Thurik, R., & Bosma, N. (2006). Success and risk factors in the pre-startup phase. Small Business Economics, 26(4), 319–335.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  70. van Stel, A., Storey, D. J., & Thurik, R. (2007). The effect of business regulations on nascent and young business entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 28(2), 171–186.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Veblen, T. (1914). The instinct of Workmanship and the State of the Industrial Arts, New York: August Kelley (reprinted with a new introduction by M.G. Murphey and a 1964 introductory note by J. Dorfman, New Brunswick, Transaction Book, 1990).

  72. Veblen, T. (1919). The place of science in modern civilization and other essays, New York, Huebsch (reprinted with a new introduction by W.J. Samuels, New Brunswick, Transaction Publishers, 1990).

  73. Veciana, J. M., & Urbano, D. (2008). The institutional approach to entrepreneurship research: Introduction. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 4(4), 365–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  74. Weber, M. (1930). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. New York: Scribner’s.

  75. Welter, F. (2005). Entrepreneurial behavior in differing environments. In H. Grimm, C. W. Wessner, & D. B. Audretsch (Eds.), Local heroes in the global village globalization and the new entrepreneurship policies. International studies in entrepreneurship (pp. 93–112). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  76. Welter, F., & Smallbone, D. (2011). Institutional perspectives on entrepreneurial behaviour in challenging environments. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(1), 107–125.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  77. Wennekers, S., van Stel, A., Thurik, R., & Reynolds, P. (2005). Nascent entrepreneurship and the level of economic development. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 293–309.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. White, H. (1980). A heteroskedasticity-consistent covariance matrix estimator and a direct test for heteroskedasticity. Econometrica, 48, 817–830.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Zucker, L. (1983). Organizations as institutions. In S. Bacharach (Ed.), Research in the sociology of organizations (Vol. 2, pp. 1–47) Greenwich.

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors appreciate helpful comments by David Audretsch in the previous versions of this manuscript. Also, the authors acknowledge the financial support from projects ECO2010-16760 (Spanish Ministry of Science and Innovation) and 2005SGR00858 (Catalan Government Department for Universities, Research and Information Society).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to David Urbano.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Urbano, D., Alvarez, C. Institutional dimensions and entrepreneurial activity: an international study. Small Bus Econ 42, 703–716 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-013-9523-7

Download citation

Keywords

  • Entrepreneurial activity
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Institutional dimensions
  • Regulative dimension
  • Normative dimension
  • Cultural-cognitive dimension
  • GEM

JEL Classification

  • L26