Refugee entrepreneurship: context and directions for future research

Abstract

This article provides an overview of future directions for research related to refugee entrepreneurship. It puts forward key concepts, explores the relations within the current broader literature on migration and entrepreneurship, and identifies several promising clusters of questions. We also introduce five papers in a special section of this issue, which offer nuanced findings and cues for further research.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Notes

  1. 1.

    This definition of the United Nation’s High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR; https://www.unhcr.org/what-is-a-refugee.html) draws on the 1951 Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees, which declared a refugee to be “someone who is unable or unwilling to return to their country of origin owing to a well-founded fear of being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, national, membership of a particular social group, or political opinion.”

  2. 2.

    Azose and Raftery (2017) provide comprehensive estimates of emigration, return migration, and transit migration and find that the share of total migration as percentage of the global population is fairly constant since 1990: between 1.13 and 1.29%.

  3. 3.

    Migration Policy Institute 2017 data on top 25 refugee destination countries and refugee share of the total population by country of destination; see https://www.migrationpolicy.org/programs/data-hub/charts/largest-refugee-populations-country-destination

  4. 4.

    See: https://refugeesmigrants.un.org/migration-compact.

  5. 5.

    Fiddian-Qasmiyeh et al. (2014) argue that the multifaceted reality of displacement makes a bounded definition of refugeeness elusive. Scheel and Squire (2014: 190) note that a consensus in recent scholarship is on the impossibility of distinguishing voluntary from forced, and economic from political determinants of mobility.

  6. 6.

    Not all displaced people are refugees, as many flee due to economic crisis, climate, environment, or natural disaster. These are not encompassed in the UNHCR definition. Also, not all people who flee will cross a border. Large numbers of internally displaced persons flee their homes without fleeing their country. For instance, since 2008, an average of 24.7 million people has been internally displaced annually due to adverse natural events like floods, droughts, and earthquakes—more than the entire stock of refugees in the world (Cazabat et al. 2019). In 2018, there were 41.3 million internally displaced persons worldwide (UNHCR 2018). Some of the countries most affected have been Syria, Colombia, the DRC, Iraq, Sudan, Yemen, South Sudan, and Nigeria.

  7. 7.

    Refugee arrivals and integration have featured significantly in the public discourse in many countries. In some cases, this can be disproportionate to the nature of inflows. For example, Alesina et al. (2018) find that most Europeans over-estimate the real number of immigrants in their country and often mistake their countries of origin and religious affiliations.

  8. 8.

    See the World Bank Doing Business Project: www.doingbusiness.org.

  9. 9.

    Some countries have special allocations and procedures for different migration pathways, e.g. family- or skill-based. A high skilled individual in an unstable country that is forced to migrate might seek economic grounds if available to them, and there may be different speed or outcomes associated with different types of applications.

References

  1. Abramitzky, R., & Bouston, L. (2017). Immigration in American economic history. Journal of Economic Literature, 55(4), 1311–1345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Alesina, A., Miano, A., & Stantcheva, S. (2018). Immigration and redistribution. NBER Working Paper no. 24733. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  3. Åslund, O., Hensvik, L., & Skans, O. (2014). Seeking similarity: how immigrants and natives manage in the labor market. Journal of Labor Economics, 32(3), 405–441.

  4. Audretsch, D., Belitski, M., & Desai, S. (2018). National Business Regulations and City entrepreneurship in Europe: a multilevel nested analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 43(6), 1148–1165.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Azose, J. J., & Raftery, A. E. (2019). Estimation of emigration, return migration, and transit migration between all pairs of countries. PNAS, 116(1), 116–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Batista, C., McIndoe-Calder, T., & Vicente, P. (2017). Return migration, self-selection and entrepreneurship. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 79(5), 797–821.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Bengtsson, O., & Hsu, D. (2015). Ethnic matching in the U.S. venture capital market. Journal of Business Venturing, 30(2), 338–354.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Betts, A., Bloom, L., Kaplan,, J. & Omata, N. (2015). Refugee economies: rethinking popular assumptions. Refugee Studies Centers, University of Oxford. https://www.rsc.ox.ac.uk/refugeeeconomies. Accessed 16 Jan 2020.

  9. Bevelander, P. (2011). The employment integration of resettled refugees, asylum claimants and family reunion migrants in Sweden. Refugee Survey Quarterly, 30(1), 22–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Borjas, G. (1987). Self-selection and the earnings of immigrants. American Economic Review, 77(4), 531–553.

  11. Brück, T., Mahé, C., & Naudé, W. (2018). Return migration and self-employment: evidence from Kyrgyzstan. IZA Discussion Paper no. 11332. Bonn: IZA Institute of Labor Economics.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Cazabat, C., Desai, B., & Wesolek, P. (2019). Monitoring progress to reduce internal displacement: building a global internal displacement index. USAID. https://www.internal-displacement.org/publications/beyond-the-numbers-monitoring-progress-to-reduce-internal-displacement.

  13. Chaaban, J., Salti, N., Ghattas, H., Irani, A., Ismail, T., & Batlouni, L. (2016). Survey on the socioeconomic status of Palestine refugees in Lebanon 2015. Beirut: American University of Beirut and United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Chimni, B. S. (2009). The birth of a ‘discipline:’ from refugee to forced migration studies. Journal of Refugee Studies, 22(1), 11–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Colletta, N., & Cullen, M. (2000). Violent conflict and the transformation of social capital: lessons from Cambodia, Rwanda, Guatemala and Somalia. Washington DC: The World Bank.

  16. Cortes, K. (2004). Are refugees different from economic immigrants? Some empirical evidence on the heterogeneity of immigrant groups in the United States. Review of Economics and Statistics, 86(2), 465–480.

  17. Costello, C., & Kaytaz, E. (2013). Building empirical research into alternatives to detention: perceptions of asylum-seekers and refugees in Toronto and Geneva. United Nations High Commission for Refugees. http://www.unhcr.org/51c1c5cf9.html.

  18. Crawford, V. (2016). 10 ways countries can help refugees integrate. World Economic Forum. https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/05/10-wayscountries-can-help-refugees-integrate/. Accessed 16 Jan 2020.

  19. Desai, S. (2016). Economic integration of refugee migrants: considerations for policymakers. Swedish Economic Forum Report.

  20. Desai, S., Acs, Z., & Weitzel, U. (2013). A model of destructive entrepreneurship: Insight for conflict and post-conflict recovery. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 57(1), 20–40.

  21. Edin, P., Frederiksson, P., & Aslund, O. (2003). Ethnic enclaves and the economic success of immigrants–evidence from a natural experiment. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 118, 329–357.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Elie, J. (2014). Histories of refugee and forced migration studies. In E. Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, G. Loescher, K. Long, & N. Sigona (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of refugee & forced migration studies (pp. 23–35). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Eurostat (2018). Power from statistics: data, information and knowledge. Luxembourg: Outlook Report.

  24. Fairlie, R., & Meyer, B. (2003). The effect of immigration on native self- employment. Journal of Labor Economics, 21(3), 619–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, E., Loescher, G., Long, K., & Sigona, N. (Eds.). (2014). The Oxford handbook of refugee & forced migration studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Gibson, J., & McKenzie, D. (2012). The economic consequencees of brain drain of the best and brightest: microeconomic evidence from five countries. Economic Journal, 122(560), 339–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Haan, M., & McDonald, T. (2018). Migration and immigration: recent advances using linked administrative data. Journal of Population Research, 35(4), 319–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hart, D., & Acs, Z. (2011). High-tech immigrant entrepreneurship in the United States. Economic Development Quarterly, 25(2), 116–129.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Hunt, J. (2011). Which immigrants are most innovative and entrepreneurial? Distinctions by entry visa. Journal of Labor Economics, 29(3), 417–457.

  30. Hunt, J. (2015). Are immigrants the most skilled US computer and engineering workers? Journal of Labor Economics, 33(S1), S39–S77.

  31. Kalnins, A., & Chung, W. (2006). Social capital, geography, and survival: Gujarati immigrant entrepreneurs in the U.S. lodging industry. Management Science, 52(2), 233–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Kerr, W. (2008). Ethnic scientific communities and international technology diffusion. Review of Economics and Statistics, 90(3), 518–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Kerr, W., & Lincoln, W. (2010). The supply side of innovation: H-1B visa reforms and U.S. ethnic invention. Journal of Labor Economics, 28(3), 473–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Kerr, S. P., & Kerr, W. R. (2016). Immigrant entrepreneurship. Working Paper no. 22385. Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.

  35. Kerwin, D. (2018). The US refugee resettlement program–a return to first principles: how refugees help to define, strengthen and revitalize the United States. Journal on Migration and Human Security, 6(3), 205–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Lewis, E., & Peri, G. (2015). Immigration and the economy of cities and regions. In Handbook of regional and urban economics(Chapter 10, pp. 625–685). North Holland: Elsevier.

  37. Lofstrom, M. (2002). Labor market assimilation and the self-employment decision of immigrant entrepreneurs. Journal of Population Economics, 15(1), 83–114.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Long, K. (2014). Rethinking ‘durable’ solutions. In E. Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, G. Loescher, K. Long, & N. Sigona (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of refugee & forced migration studies (pp. 475–487). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Maani, S. (2016). Ethnic networks and location choices of immigrants. IZA World of Labor Brief 284. https://wol.iza.org/articles/ethnic-networks-and-location-choice-of-immigrants/long. Accessed 19 Nov 2019.

  40. Moser, P., Voena, A., & Waldinger, F. (2014). German-Jewish emigres and US invention. American Economic Review, 104(10), 3222–3255.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Nassar, J., & Stel, N. (2019). Lebanon’s response to the Syrian refugee crisis–institutional ambiguity as a governance strategy. Political Geography, 70, 44–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Naudé, W. (2018). Migration and entrepreneurship in the context of future Sectoral and demographic transitions in Europe and Africa. In D. Ratha (Ed.), Experts Meeting on the Global Compact on Migration: Overview and Background Papers (pp. 47–54). Berlin: KNOMAD: Global knowledge partnership on migration and development.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Naudé, W., Marchand, K., & Siegel, M. (2017). Migration, entrepreneurship and development: critical questions. IZA Journal of Migration, 6(5). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40176-016-0077-8.

  44. Oberski, D., Kirchner, A., Eckman, A., & Kreuter, F. (2018). Evaluating the quality of survey and administrative data with generalized multitrait-multimethod models. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 112(520), 1477–1489.

  45. Obukhova, E., Wang, Y., & Li, J. (2013). The power of local networks: returnee entrepreneurs, school ties, and firm performance. Proceedings. https://doi.org/10.5465/ambpp.2013.10740abstract.

  46. OECD (2016). Making integration work: refugees and others in need of protection. Paris: OECD.

  47. OECD (2019). Ready to help?: improving resilience of integration systems for refugees and other vulnerable migrants. Paris: OECD.

  48. Peri, G. (2016). Immigrants, productivity, and labor markets. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 30(4), 3–30.

  49. Rashid, L. (2018). “Call me a business owner, not a refugee! Challenges of and perspectives on newcomer entrepreneurship,” World Refugee Council Research Paper No 7. Centre for International Governance Innovation and World Refugee Council.

  50. Ruist, J. (2015a). The fiscal cost of refugee immigration: the example of Sweden. Population and Development Review, 41(4), 567–581.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Ruist, J. (2015b). Refugee immigration and public finances in Sweden, University of Gothenberg, working papers in economics 613. University of Gothenberg. https://gupea.ub.gu.se/handle/2077/38323. Accessed 19 Nov 2019.

  52. Saxenian, A. ( 2002). Silicon valley’s new immigrant high-growth entrepreneurs. Economic Development Quarterly, 16(1), 20–31.

  53. Scheel, S., & Squire, V. (2014). Forced migrants as ‘illegal’ migrants. In E. Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, G. Loescher, K. Long, & N. Sigona (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of refugee & forced migration studies (pp. 188–199). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Schuster, A., Desiderio, M., & Urso, G. (2013). Recognition of qualifications and competences of migrants. Brussels: International Organization for Migration.

  55. Stel, N. M. (2013). “Diaspora versus refugee. The political economy of Lebanese entrepreneurship regimes.” Maastricht School of Management Working Paper No. 2013/6.

  56. Stenholm, P., Acs, Z., & Wuebker, R. (2013). Exploring country-level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(1), 176–193.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Stephan, P., & Levin, S. (2001). Exceptional contributions to US science by the foreign-born and foreign-educated. Population Research and Policy Review, 20(1-2), 59–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Stepputat, F., & Nyberg Sørensen, N. (2014). Sociology and forced migration. In E. Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, G. Loescher, K. Long, & N. Sigona (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of refugee & forced migration studies (pp. 86–98). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  59. UN ESCAP (2013). Statistical yearbook for Asia and the Pacific 2013. Bangkok: UN ESCAP.

  60. UNHCR (2018). Global trends: forced displacement in 2018.  United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees. https://www.unhcr.org/globaltrends2018/. Accessed 16 Jan 2020. 

  61. UNHCR (2019). Figures at a glance, statistical yearbooks. United Nations High Commission for Refugees. https://www.unhcr.org/en-us/figures-at-a-glance.html. Accessed 19 Nov 2019.

  62. UN WOMEN (2015). Progress of the world’s women 2015-2016: Transforming economies, realizing rights. https://www.unwomen.org/en/digital-library/progress-of-ofthe-worlds-women. Accessed 16 Jan 2020.

  63. Uzelac, A., & Meester, J. (2018). Is there protection in the region? Leveraging funds and political capital in Lebanon’s refugee crisis. The Hague: Clingendael Institute.

  64. Wadhwa, V., Saxenian, A., Rissing, B. A., & Gereffi, G. (2007). America’s new immigrant entrepreneurs: Part I, Duke Science, Technology and Innovation Paper No. 23. https://ssrn.com/abstract=990152.

  65. Wahba, J. (2015). Selection, selection, selection: the impact of return migration. Journal of Population Economics, 28(3), 535–563.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Wang, X., & Maani, S. (2014). Ethnic capital and self-employment: a spatially autoregressive network approach. IZA Journal of Migration, 3(18). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40176-014-0018-3

  67. Wauters, B., & Lambrecht, J. (2008). Barriers to refugee entrepreneurship in Belgium: towards an explanatory model. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 34(6), 895–915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Zetter, R. (2007). More labels, fewer refugees: remaking the refuge label in an era of globalization. Journal of Refugee Studies, 20(2), 172–192.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We are grateful to Maksim Belitski, Johan Eklund, Besnik Krasniqi, and participants at the 2017 Transatlantic Policy Consortium meeting for discussions about this topic.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sameeksha Desai.

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

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Desai, S., Naudé, W. & Stel, N. Refugee entrepreneurship: context and directions for future research. Small Bus Econ 56, 933–945 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00310-1

Download citation

Keywords

  • Forced migration
  • Refugees
  • Entrepreneurship
  • Immigration
  • Self-employment
  • Labor markets

JEL classifications

  • J61
  • F22
  • L26
  • O15