Entry, Exit, and Productivity in Tunisian Manufacturing Industries

  • Riadh Ben Jelili
  • Mohamed Goaied


For a number of MENA economies, the barriers to entrepreneurship manifest by the unfriendly environment for start-ups and relatively high regulatory and administrative burdens are estimated to be among the highest in the world. Potential investors and existing firms in those countries face a complex regulations and licensing requirements which are often unclear or inconsistent with international norms. Policy, regulatory and institutional distortions, as well as constraints and barriers to efficient private sector investment, operations and exit, are then prevalent throughout the region. Complexity and the rents created by economic distortions breed administrative discretion and corruption. The bureaucratic burden is often especially heavy for small and medium enterprises. Higher levels of government rent seeking and/or bureaucratic obstacles to legal firm entry will lead to a greater bifurcation of firm sizes – very small informal firms, relatively large formal firms and an absence of medium sized formal firms.


Labor Productivity Total Factor Productivity Exit Rate Entry Rate Potential Entrant 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Agarwal R (1997) Survival of firms over the product life cycle. South Econ J 3:571–584CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Agarwal R, Audretsch DB (2001) Does entry size matter? The impact of life cycle and technology on firm survival. J Ind Econ 49:21–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cincera M, Galgau O (2005) Impact of market entry and exit on EU productivity and growth performance. European Commission Economic Papers No. 222Google Scholar
  4. Clerides SK, Lach S, Tybout JR (1998) Is learning-by-exporting important? Micro-dynamic evidence from Colombia, Morocco, and Mexico. Q J Econ 113(3):903–947CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Di Tommaso MR, Lanzoni E, Rubini L (2001) Support to SMEs in the Arab region: the case of Tunisia. UNIDO/UNDP, UNIDO ItaliaGoogle Scholar
  6. Disney R, Haskel J, Heden Y (2003) Restructuring and productivity growth in UK manufacturing. Econ J 113(489):666–694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Dixit A (1981) The role of investment in entry deterrence’. Econ J 90:95–106CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Djankov S, La Porta R, Lopez-De-Silanes F, Shleifer A (2002) The regulation of entry. Q J Econ CXVII (1):1–37Google Scholar
  9. Djankov S, McLiesh C, Ramalho R (2006) Regulation and growth. Econ Lett 92(3):395–401CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Evans LB, Siegfried JJ (1992) Entry and exit in United States manufacturing industries from 1977 to 1982. In: Audretsch DB, Sigfried JJ (eds) Empirical studies in honour of Leonard W. Weiss. Kluwer, Boston, pp 253–273Google Scholar
  11. Geroski PA, Mazzucato J (2001) Modelling the dynamics of industry populations. Int J Ind Organ 19:1003–1022CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Klepper S, Simons KL (2005) Industry shakeouts and technological change. Int J Ind Organ 23:23–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Morrisson C, Talbi B (1996) La croissance de l’économie tunisienne en longue période. OCDE, ParisGoogle Scholar
  14. Murphy EC (1999) Economic and political change in Tunisia: from Bourguiba to Ben Ali. MacMillan Press, HoundmillsCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Roberts BM, Thompson S (2003) Entry and exit in a transition economy: the case of Poland. Rev Ind Organ 22:225–243CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Scarpetta S, Hemmings P, Tressel T, Woo J (2002) The role of policy and institutions for productivity and firm dynamics: evidence from micro and industry data. Economic Working Paper 15, OECD, ParisGoogle Scholar
  17. Shapiro D, Khemani RS (1987) The determinants of entry and exit reconsidered. Int J Ind Organ 5:15–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Arab Planning InstituteSafatState of Kuwait

Personalised recommendations