Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

What a Difference a Y makes-Female and Male Nascent Entrepreneurs in Germany

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In western industrialized countries men are on average more than twice as active in entrepreneurship as women. Based on data from a recent representative survey of the adult population in Germany this paper uses an empirical model for the decision to become self-employed to test for differences between women and men in the ceteris paribus impact of several characteristics and attitudes, taking the rare events nature of becoming an entrepreneur into account. Furthermore, a non-parametric approach using Mahalanobis- distance matching of man and woman which are as similar as possible in all characteristics and attitudes but the “small difference” is used to investigate the difference in the propensity to become self-employed by sex. A core finding is that the difference between men and women in both the extent and the effect of considering fear of failure to be a reason not to start one’s own business is important for the explanation of the gap in entrepreneurship by sex.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Acs, Z. J., P. A., Michael Hey and M. Minniti, 2005, Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, 2004 Executive Report, Babson College and London Business School.

  • Alsos G. A. and Ljunggren E. (1998). Does the Business Start-Up Process Differ by Gender? A Longitudinal Study of Nascent Entrepreneurs. Frontiers of Entrepreneurial Research, Babson College, Wellesley, MA .

    Google Scholar 

  • Armington C. and Acs Z. J. (2002). The Determinants of Regional Variation in New Firm Formation. Regional Studies 36: 33–45 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Audretsch D. B. and Fritsch M. (1994). The Geography of Firm Births in Germany. Regional Studies 28: 359–365 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beesley M. E. and Hamilton R. T. (1984). Small Firms Seedbed Role and the Concept of Turbulence. Journal of Industrial Economics XXXIII: 217–231 .

    Google Scholar 

  • Bergmann, H., 2004, Gründungsaktivitäten im regionalen Kontext. Eine Untersuchung von Gründern, Gründungseinstellungen und Rahmenbedingungen in zehn deutschen Regionen auf der Basis von Mikrodaten. (Kölner Forschungen zur Wirtschafts- und Sozialgeographie, 57) Köln: Universität zu Köln.

  • Bergmann, H., A. Japsen and C. Tamasy, 2002, Regionaler Entrepreneurship Monitor (REM) – Gründungsaktivitäten und Rahmenbedingungen in zehn deutschen Regionen. Universität zu Köln and Universität Lüneburg.

  • Blanchflower, D. G., 2004, Self-employment: More may not be better. National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) Working Paper 10286, February.

  • Blanchflower D. G. and Meyer B. D. (1994). A Longitudinal Analysis of the Young Self-Employed in Australia and the United States. Small Business Economics 6: 1–19 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blinder A. S. (1973). Wage Discrimination: Reduced Form and Structural Variables. Journal of Human Resources 8: 436–455 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boden R. J. (1996). Gender and Self-Employment Selection: An Empirical Assessment. Journal of Socio-Economics 25: 671–682 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Boden R. J. (1999). Flexible Working Hours, Family Responsibilities and Female Self-Employment: Gender Differences in Self-Employment Selection. American Journal of Economics and Sociology 58(1): 71–83 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Borjas G. J. (2000). Labor Economics. McGraw-Hill, Boston etc .

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruce D. (1999). Do Husbands Matter? Married Women Entering Self-Employment. Small Business Economics 13(4): 317–329 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carr D. (1996). Two paths to self-employment? Women’s and men’s self-employment in the United States, 1980. Work and Occupations 23: 26–53 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter N. (1997). Entrepreneurial Processes and Outcomes: The Influence of Gender. In: Paul, D. R. and Sammis, B. W. (eds) The Entrepreneurial Process. Economic Growth, Men, Women and Minorities, pp. Quorum Books, Westport, Connecticut, and London .

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter N. (2002). The Role of Risk Orientation on financing Expectations in New Venture Creation: Does Sex Matter?. Frontiers of Entrepreneurial Research, Babson College, Wellesley, MA .

    Google Scholar 

  • Carter, N., and L. Kolvereid, 1998, Woman starting new businesses: The experience in Norway and the United States, in: OECD, Women Entrepreneurs in Small and Medium Enterprises. Paris: OECD Publications.

  • Carter S. (2001). Women’s Business Ownership: A Review of the Academic, Popular and Internet Literature. Report to the Small Business Service, Department of Marketing, University of Strathclyde, mimeo .

    Google Scholar 

  • Cramer J. S., Hartog J. and Jonker N. (2002). Low Risk Aversion Encourages The Choice For Entrepreneurship: An Empirical Test of a Truism. Journal of Economic Behavior and Organization 48: 29–36 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmar F. and Davidsson P. (2000). Where Do They Come From? Prevalence and Characteristics of Nascent Entrepreneurs. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 12: 1–23 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Devine, T. J., 1994, ‘Characteristics of self-employed women in the United States’, Monthly Labor Review 117(3), March, 20–34.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eckel, C. C., and P. J., Grossman, 2003, Forecasting Risk Attitudes: An Experimental Study of Actual and Forecast Risk Attitudes of Woman and Men. Mimeo, Virginia Tech and St. Cloud State University, October.

  • Engel, D., and F. Welter, 2004, Dreamers and Doers – Who succeeds in the Process of Venture Creation? Draft, RWI Essen, January.

  • Evans D. S. and Jovanovic B. (1989). An Estimated Model of Entrepreneurial Choice under Liquidity Constraints. Journal of Political Economy 97: 808–827 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Evans D. S. and Leighton L. S. (1989). Some Empirical Aspects␣of Entrepreneurship. American Economic Review 79: 519–535 .

    Google Scholar 

  • Fairlie R. W. (1999). The Absence of the African-American Owned Business: An Analysis of the Dynamics of Self-Employment. Journal of Labor Economics 17: 80–108 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fairlie, R. W., 2003, An Extension of the Blinder-Oaxaca Decomposition Technique to Logit and Probit Models. Economic Growth Center, Yale University, Discussion Paper No. 873, November.

  • Fehrenbach S. and Lauxen-Ulbrich M. (2002). A Gender View on Self-Employment in Germany. Institute for Small Business Research, University of Mannheim, mimeo .

    Google Scholar 

  • Fischer E. M., Rebecca Reuber A. and Dyke L. S. (1993). A Theoretical Overview and Extension of Research on Sex, Gender, and Entrepreneurship. Journal of Business Venturing 8: 151–168 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gerlach K. and Wagner J. (1994). Regional differences in small firm entry in manufacturing industries: Lower Saxony, 1979–1991. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development 6: 63–80 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Georgellis, Y., and H. J. Wall, 2000, Gender Differences in Self-Employment: Panel Evidence from Germany. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis Working Paper 99–008B, November.

  • Greene W. H. (2000). Econometric Analysis. Prentice Hall International, Upper Saddle River, NJ .

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman J. J., Lalonde R. J. and Smith J. A. (1999). The economics and econometrics of active labor market programs. In: Orley, C. A. and David, C. (eds) Handbook of Labor Economics Volume 3A, pp 1865–2097. , Amsterdam: North-Holland.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Hübler O. (1991). Was unterscheidet Freiberufler, Gewerbetreibende und abhängig Beschäftigte?. Eine ökonometrische Untersuchung über Gruppenheterogenität, Einkommensdeterminanten und Statuswechsler, Mitteilungen aus der Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung 24: 101–114 .

    Google Scholar 

  • Hübler O. (1992). Selbständige in Ostdeutschland. Eine theoretische und mikro-ökonometrische Analyse, Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung, Heft 3/4: 107–129 .

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson P. S. (1986). New Firms: An Economic Perspective. Allen and Unwin, London .

    Google Scholar 

  • Jungbauer-Gans M. (1993). Frauen als Unternehmerinnen. eine Untersuchung der Erfolgs- und Überlebenschancen neugegrÜndeter Frauen- und Männerbetriebe. Frankfurt am Main etc, Peter Lang .

    Google Scholar 

  • (2004). Chefinnensache. Frauen in der unternehmerischen Praxis, Heidelberg: Physica .

    Google Scholar 

  • Kihlstrom R. E. and Laffont J.-J. (1979). A General Equilibrium Entrepreneurial Theory of Firm Formation Based on Risk Aversion. Journal of Political Economy 87: 719–748 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • King G. and Zeng L. (2001a). Logistic Regression in Rare Events Data. Political Analysis 9(2): 137–163 .

    Google Scholar 

  • King G. and Zeng L. (2001b). Explaining Rare Events in International Relations. International Organization 55(3): 693–715 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lauxen-Ulbrich M. and Leicht R. (2003). First Statistical Overview – National Report on Women (Start-up) Entrepreneurs and Female Self-employed in Germany. Small Business Research Institute, University of Mannheim, mimeo .

    Google Scholar 

  • Lazear, E. P., 2002, Entrepreneurship. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper 9109, August.

  • Le A. T. (1999). Empirical Studies of Self-Employment. Journal of Economic Surveys 13(4): 381–416 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lechner M. and Pfeiffer F. (1993). Planning for Self-Employment at the Beginning of a Market Economy: Evidence from Individual Data of East German Workers. Small Business Economics 5: 111–128 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Leicht R. and Welter F. (2004). Gründerinnen und selbständige Frauen. Potenziale, Strukturen und Entwicklungen in Deutschland, Karlsruhe: v. Loeper .

    Google Scholar 

  • Leuven, E. and B. Sianesi, 2003, PSMATCH2: Stata module to perform full Mahalanobis and propensity score matching, common support graphing, and covariate imbalance testing. http://ideas.repec.org/c/boc/bocode/s432001.html. Version 1.2.3.

  • Linan Alcalde, F., D. M. Martin and R. Gonzales Rodriguez, 2002, Characteristics of nascent entrepreneurs in Germany, Paper presented at the 42nd ERSA Conference, Dortmund, 27–31 August 2002, mimeo, Universidad de Sevilla.

  • Long J. S. and Freese J. (2001). Regression Models for Categorical Dependent Variables using Stata. TX: Stata Press, College Station .

    Google Scholar 

  • Lückgen, I. and D. Oberschachtsiek, 2004, Regionaler Entrepreneurship Monitor (REM II 2003/2004), Zur Dynamik von Gründungsaktivitäten in Deutschland: Ausmaß und Ursachen, Universität zu Köln und Universität Lüneburg.

  • Lohmann, H., 2001, Self-employed or employee, full-time or part-time? Gender differences in the determinants and conditions for self-employment in Europe and the US. Arbeitspapiere – Mannheimer Zentrum für Europäische Sozialforschung (MZES), Nr. 38.

  • Mason C. (1991). Spatial Variations in Enterprise: The Geography of New Firm Formation. In: Burrows, R. (eds) Deciphering the Enterprise Culture. Entrepreneurship, Petty Capitalism and the Restructuring of Britain, pp. Routledge, London and New York .

    Google Scholar 

  • McManus P. A. (2001). Women’s Participation in Self-Employment in Western Industrialized Nations. International Journal of Sociology 31(2): 70–97 .

    Google Scholar 

  • Minniti, M. and P. Arenius, 2003, Women in Entrepreneurship. Paper presented at “The Entrepreneurial Advantage of Nations: First Annual Global Entrepreneurship Symposium”, United Nations Headquarters, April 29, 2003.

  • Minniti, M., P. Arenius and N. Langowitz, 2005, Global Entrepreneurship Monitor, 2004 Report on Women and Entrepreneurship, Babson College and London Business School.

  • Moore C. S. and Mueller R. E. (2002). The Transition From Paid to Self-Employment in Canada: The Importance of Push Factors. Applied Economics 34: 791–801 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nielsen H. S. (1998). Discrimination and Detailed Decomposition in a Logit Model. Economics Letters 61: 115–120 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nopo, H., 2004, Matching as a Tool to Decompose Wage Gaps. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Discussion Paper 981, January.

  • Oaxaca R. L. (1973). Male-Female Wage Differentials in Urban Labor Markets. International Economic Review 14: 693–709 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Oaxaca R. L. and Ransom M. R. (1994). On Discrimination and the Decomposition of Wage Differentials. Journal of Econometrics 61: 5–21 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • (2000). Employment Outlook. OECD, Paris .

    Google Scholar 

  • Parker S. (2004). The Economics of Self-Employment and Entrepreneurship. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, etc .

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds P. D. (1997). Who Starts New Firms? – Preliminary Explorations of Firms-in-Gestation. Small Business Economics 9: 449–462 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds P. D. (2000). GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. 2000 Executive Report. Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership, Kansas City .

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds P. D. (2001). GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. 2000 Executive Report. Kauffman Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership, Kansas City .

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds P. D. (2004). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2003 Executive Report. , Babson College.

  • Reynods P. D., Storey D. and Westhead P. (1994). Cross- national Comparisons of the Variation in New Firm Formation Rates. Regional Studies 28: 443–356 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rybczynski, K., 2004, Gender Differences in the Incidence and Duration of Self-Employment. Mimeo, Queen’s University, January.

  • Simpson, W. and R. Sproule, 1998, Econometric Analysis of Canadian Self-Employment Using SLID. Income and Labour Dynamics Working Paper Series: Statistics Canada Product Number 75F002M, November.

  • Sorensen O. and Audia P. G. (2000). The Social Structure of Entrepreneurial Activity: Geographic Concentration of Footwear Production in the United States, 1940–1989. American Journal of Sociology 106: 424–462 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • StataCorp, 2003, Stata Statistical Software: Release 8.0. College Station, TX: Stata Corporation.

  • Statistisches Bundesamt, 2002, Datenreport 2002, Zahlen und Fakten über die Bundesrepublik Deutschland. Bonn: Bundeszentrale für politische Bildung.

  • Sternberg R. and Bergmann H. (2003). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Länderbericht Deutschland 2002, Universität zu Köln .

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg R., Bergmann H. and Lückgen I. (2004). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Länderbericht Deutschland 2003, Universität zu Köln .

    Google Scholar 

  • Sternberg R. and Lückgen I. (2005). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. Länderbericht Deutschland 2004, Universität zu Köln .

    Google Scholar 

  • Strohmeyer, R. and R. Leicht, 2000, Small Training Firms: A Breeding Ground for Self-Employment? International Journal of Sociology 30(4), 59–89.

    Google Scholar 

  • Studenmund A. H. (2001). Using Econometrics, A Practical Guide. Addison Wesley Longman, Boston etc .

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner J. (2003a). Testing Lazear’s Jack-of-all-trades View of Entrepreneurship with German Micro Data. Applied Economics Letters 10: 687–689 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J., 2003b, Are Nascent Entrepreneurs Jacks-of-all-Trades? A Test of Lazear’s Theory of Entrepreneurship with German data. Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA) Discussion Paper 911, September (forthcoming in: Applied Economics).

  • Wagner J. (2003c). The Impact of Personal Characteristics and the Regional Milieu on the Transition From Unemployment to Self-Employment: Empirical Evidence for Germany. Jahrbücher für Nationalökonomie und Statistik 223: 204–222 .

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner J. (2003d). Taking a second chance – Entrepreneurial restarters in Germany. Applied Economics Quarterly 49: 255–272 .

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner, J., 2004, Are young and small firms hothouses for nascent entrepreneurs? Evidence from German micro data, Applied Economics Quarterly 50, 379–391.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wagner J. and Sternberg R. (2004). Start-up Activities, Individual Characteristics and the Regional Milieu: Lessons for Entrepreneurship Support Policies From German Micro Data. Annals of Regional Science 38: 219–240 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner J. and Sternberg R. (2005). Personal and Regional Determinants of Entrepreneurial Activities: Empirical Evidence from the Regional Entrepreneurship Monitor (REM) Germany. Jahrbuch für Regionalwissenschaft 25: 91–105 .

    Google Scholar 

  • Welter, F. and B. Lagemann, 2003, Gründerinnen in Deutschland – Potenziale und institutionelles Umfeld. Essen: Rheinisch-Westfälisches Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung.

  • WieBner, F., 2001, Arbeitslose werden Unternehmer. Nürnberg: Institut für Arbeitsmarkt- und Berufsforschung der Bundesanstalt für Arbeit.

  • Yun M.-S. (2004). Decomposing Differences in the First Moment. Economics Letters 82: 275–280 .

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Institute of Economics, University of Lueneburg, D-21332 , Lueneburg, Germany

    Joachim Wagner

Authors
  1. Joachim Wagner
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joachim Wagner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wagner, J. What a Difference a Y makes-Female and Male Nascent Entrepreneurs in Germany. Small Bus Econ 28, 1–21 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-005-0259-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-005-0259-x

Keywords

JEL classification

Search

Navigation