Skip to main content

Impact of Institutions on the Performance of Firms in India: Towards Policy Implications for MSMEs from Empirical Evidence

  • 383 Accesses

Abstract

The present paper aims to study the impact of institutions on the performance of MSMEs in India. The study is mainly based on secondary data, i.e. 73rd round survey (2015–16) of unincorporated non-agricultural enterprises conducted by National Sample Survey Office (NSSO). Different types of regulations have been considered as proxy for institutions. It has been assumed that a firm registered under a particular regulation follows it and obtains benefits provided by the government under that regulation. The study observes that only around 30% of firms are registered under any regulations. Performance of registered firms is higher than that of unregistered firms. Further, registration has significant positive impact on the performance of firms. Since majority of MSMEs are owned by social backward groups, any policy intervention supporting growth of MSMEs may be more beneficial to socially backward groups and which may also help in social transformation.

Keywords

  • MSMEs
  • Non-agricultural enterprises
  • Firm performance
  • Policy incentives
  • Institutional norms
  • Sustainable development
  • Social transformation

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   109.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   139.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    The concepts of productive and unproductive entrepreneurship are coined by Baumol (1990). He categorises entrepreneurship in terms of activities. Productive entrepreneurship represents entrepreneurial activities such as innovation while unproductive entrepreneurship represents entrepreneurial activities such as renting and crime.

  2. 2.

    The term ‘Micro, small and mediumenterprises (MSMEs)’ is generally used for small firms across the world despite variations in their definitions. Majority of the countries/organisations have their own definitions of small firms.

  3. 3.

    This estimate is based on 73rd round of NSSO survey of unincorporated non-agricultural enterprises (excluding construction) conducted in 2015–16.

  4. 4.

    It does not include incorporated enterprises. However, the proportion of MSMEs in incorporated enterprises is very less. Thus, the findings based on this study will not affect general understanding about MSMEs in India.

  5. 5.

    Without dropping the inconsistent observation from the original dataset, the total number of unincorporated enterprises in the country in 2015–16 is around 63 million.

  6. 6.

    Total factor productivity is also called multi factor productivity. It is a measure of economic efficiency.

References

  • Acemoglu, D., Gallego, F. A., & Robinson, J. A. (2014). Institutions, human capital, and development. Annual Reviews of Economica,6(1), 875–912.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Acemoglu, D., & Johnson, S. (2005). Unbundling institutions. Journal of Political Economy,113(5), 949–995.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2001). The colonial origins of comparative development: An empirical investigation. American Economic Review,91(5), 1369–1401.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. (2002). Reversal of fortune: Geography and institutions in the making of the modern world income distribution. Quarterly Journal of Economics,117(4), 1231–1294.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Acemoglu, D., Johnson, S., & Robinson, J. A. (2005). The rise of Europe: Atlantic trade, institutional change and economic growth. American Economic Review,95(3), 546–579.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Alowaihan, A. K. (2004). Gender and business performance of Kuwaiti small firms: A comparative approach. International Journal of Commerce and Management,14(3/4), 69–82.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Amran, N. A. (2011). The effect of owner’s gender and age to firm performance: A review on Malaysian public listed family businesses. Journal of Global Business and Economics,2(1), 104–116.

    Google Scholar 

  • Babirye, S., Niringiye, A., & Katerega, E. (2014). Firm size and rate of growth of Ugandan manufacturing firms. Journal of Applied Economics and Business Research,4(3), 178–188.

    Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Baumol, W. J. (2004). On entrepreneurship, growth and rent-seeking: Henry George updated. The American Economist,48(1), 9–16.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Beck, T., Demirgüc-Kunt, A., & Maksimovic, V. (2005). Financial and legal constraints to firm growth: Does firm size matter? The Journal of Finance,60(1), 137–177.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bentzen, J., Madsen, E. S., & Smith, V. (2012). Do firms’ growth rates depend on firm size? Small Business Economics,39(4), 937–947.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Boettke, P., & Fink, A. (2011). Institutions first. Journal of Institutional Economics,7(4), 499–504.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Carr, J. C., Haggard, K. S., Hmieleski, K. M., & Zahra, S. A. (2010). A study of the moderating effects of firm age at internationalization on firm survival and short-term growth. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal,4(2), 183–192.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • de la Cruz, M. E., Jover, A. J. V., & Gras, J. M. G. (2018). Influence of the entrepreneur’s social identity on business performance through effectuation. European Research on Management and Business Economics,24(2), 90–96.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fahed-Sreih, J., & Djoundourian, S. (2006). Determinants of longevity and success in Lebanese family businesses: An exploratory study. Family Business Review,19(3), 225–234.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Farrell, D. (2004). The hidden dangers of the informal economy. McKinsey Quarterly,3, 27–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fauchart, E., & Gruber, M. (2011). Darwinians, communitarians and missionaries: The role of founder identity in entrepreneurship. Academy of Management Journal,54(5), 935–957.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Ganyam, A. I., & Ivungu, J. A. (2019). Effect of accounting information system on financial performance of firms: A review of literature. IOSR Journal of Business and Management (IOSR-JBM), 21(5), 39–49.

    Google Scholar 

  • Granato, J., Inglehart, R., & Leblang, D. (1996). The effect of cultural values on economic development: Theory, hypotheses, and some empirical tests. American Journal of Political Science,40(3), 607–631.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Greif, A. (1994). Cultural beliefs and the organization of society: A historical and theoretical reflection on collectivists and individualists societies. Journal of Political Economy,102(5), 912–950.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hall, R. E., & Jones, C. I. (1997). What have we learned from recent empirical growth research? Levels of economic activity across countries. American Economic Review,87(2), 173–177.

    Google Scholar 

  • Herrera-Echeverri, H., Haar, J., & Benavides, J. (2014). Foreign direct investment, institutional quality, economic freedom and entrepreneurship in emerging markets. Journal of Business Research,67(9), 1921–1932.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Khalife, D., & Chalouhi, A. (2013). Gender and business performance. International Strategic Management Review,1(1–2), 1–10.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Kirzner, I. M. (1999). Creativity and/or alertness: A reconsideration of the Schumpeterian entrepreneur. Review of Austrian Economics,11, 5–17.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty, and profit. Boston and New York: Houghton Mi-fflin Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., Lopez-de-Silanes, F., Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. (1997). Legal determinants of external finance. The Journal of Finance,52(3), 1131–1150.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., & Shleifer, A. (2008). The unofficial economy and economic development. Brookings Papers on Economic Activity,2008(2), 275–352.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • La Porta, R., & Shleifer, A. (2014). Informality and development. Journal of Economic Perspectives,28(3), 109–126.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Leuz, C., Nanda, D., & Wysocki, P. D. (2003). Earnings management and investor protection: An international comparison. Journal of Financial Economics,69(3), 505–527.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Marx, K. (1867). Capital. Harmondsworth: Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClelland, D. C. (1961). The achieving society. Princeton: D. Van Norstand Co.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Minai, M. S., & Lucky, E. O. I. (2011). The moderating effect of location on small firm performance: Empirical evidence. International Journal of Business Management,6(10), 178–192.

    Google Scholar 

  • MoMSMEs. (2019a). Annual report 2018–19. New Delhi: Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MoMSMEs), Government of India. Available at https://msme.gov.in/sites/default/files/Annualrprt.pdf. Accessed 1 June 2020.

  • MoMSMEs. (2019b). Press Information Bureau. New Delhi: Ministry of Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises (MoMSMEs), Government of India. Available at https://pib.gov.in/Pressreleaseshare.aspx?PRID=1579757. Accessed 1 June 2020.

  • Navaretti, G. B., Castellani, D., & Pieri, F. (2014). Age and firm growth: Evidence from three European countries. Small Business Economics,43(4), 823–837.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C. (1994). Economic performance through time. The American Economic Review,84(3), 359–368.

    Google Scholar 

  • North, D. C., & Thomas, R. P. (1973). The rise of the Western world: A new economic history. New York: Cambridge University Press.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Onaolapo, A., & Odetayo, T. (2012). Effect of accounting information system on organizational effectiveness: A case study of selected construction companies in Ibadan, Nigeria. American Journal of Business and Management,1(4), 183–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, R. (2008). Skills and productivity in the informal economy (Employment Working Paper No. 5). Geneva: International Labour Office, Skills and Employment Department.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rand, J., & Torm, N. (2012). The benefits of formalization: Evidence from Vietnamese manufacturing SMEs. World Development,40(5), 983–998.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • RBI. (2019). Report of the Expert Committee on Micro, Small and Medium Enterprises. Mumbai: Reserve Bank of India (RBI). Available at rbidocs.rbi.org.in/rdocs//PublicationReport/Pdfs/MSMES24062019465CF8CB30594AC29A7A010E8A2A034C.PDF. Accessed 25 July 2020.

  • Rodrik, D., Subramanian, A., & Trebbi, F. (2004). Institutions rule: The primacy of institutions over geography and integration in economic development. Journal of Economic Growth,9(2), 131–165.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Schumpeter, J. A. (1934). The theory of economic development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Scott, W. R. (1995). Institutions and organizations. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, A. K., & Singh, B. V. (2013). Impact of social laws on viable economic growth. The Indian Economic Journal,61(3), 481–491.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Singh, S., Singh, B. V., & Sharma, A. K. (2008). Efficacy of law in realizing capability of factors of production: A study of extended production function from a panel of small and tiny industries. The Indian Economic Journal,56(3), 79–89.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

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

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Sridhar, K. S., & Guanghua, W. (2010). Firm location choice in cities: Evidence from China, India, and Brazil. China Economic Review,21(1), 113–122.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Swank, D. (1996). Culture, institutions and economic growth: Theory, recent evidence, and the role of communitarian polities. American Journal of Political Science,40(3), 660–679.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tabellini, G. (2010). Culture and institutions: Economic development in the regions of Europe. Journal of the European Economic Association,8(4), 677–716.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Urquía, G., Pérez, E., & Muñoz, C. (2011). The impact of accounting information systems (AIS) on performance measures: Empirical evidence in Spanish SME. The International Journal of Digital Accounting Research,11, 25–46.

    Google Scholar 

  • Voigt, S. (2013). How (not) to measure institutions. Journal of Institutional Economics,9(1), 1–26.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Vries, J. D. (2010). The limits of globalization in the early modern world. The Economic Review,63(3), 710–733.

    Google Scholar 

  • Watson, J. (2002). Comparing the performance of male-and female-controlled businesses: Relating outputs to inputs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,26(3), 91–100.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. (1930). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. London: Allen and Unwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whetten, D. A., & Mackey, A. (2002). A social actor conception of organizational identity and its implications for the study of organizational reputation. Business and Society,41(4), 393–414.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. C., & Kedir, A. (2016). Business registration and firm performance: Some lessons from India. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship,21(3), 1–21.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, C. C., & Shahid, M. (2015). Informal entrepreneurship and institutional theory: Explaining the varying degrees of (in) formalization of entrepreneurs in Pakistan. Entrepreneurship and Regional Development,28(1–2), 1–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williamson, O. E. (2000). The new institutional economics: Taking stock, looking ahead. Journal of Economic Literature,38(3), 595–613.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Yay, T., Yay, G. G., & Aksoy, T. (2018). Impact of institutions on entrepreneurship: A panel data analysis. Eurasian Economic Review,8(1), 131–160.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Akhilesh K. Sharma .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Appendix

Appendix

Table 13.6 Registration of unincorporated enterprises across states
Table 13.7 Registration of unincorporated enterprises across activities (NIC 2 digit)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Sharma, A.K. (2021). Impact of Institutions on the Performance of Firms in India: Towards Policy Implications for MSMEs from Empirical Evidence. In: Yamahata, C., Seekins, D.M., Takeda, M. (eds) Social Transformations in India, Myanmar, and Thailand: Volume I. Palgrave Macmillan, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-9616-2_13

Download citation