Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Disaggregating entrepreneurial orientation: the non-linear impact of innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking on SME performance

  • Published:
Small Business Economics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Previous studies have generally established a positive relationship between aggregated measures of entrepreneurial orientation (EO) and firm performance. However, there are theoretical reasons suggesting that three dimensions of EO (innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking) may possess differential relationships with performance in smaller firms. This study utilizes a sample consisting of 1,668 small-to-medium sized enterprises (SMEs) in nine countries across 13 different industries to provide a finer-grained analysis of the EO-performance relationship. Specifically, we theorize and test a non-monotonic influence of innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking on SME performance. Innovativeness and proactiveness displayed predominantly positive U-shaped relationships with SME performance. Risk-taking, however, displayed a predominantly negative U-shaped relationship with SME performance. Further, individualism was found to positively moderate the relationships between innovativeness-performance and proactiveness-performance. Taken together, these results suggest that differential relationships exist between three dimensions of EO and SME performance, with important theoretical implications for future EO research.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. We recognize that EO has been conceptualized with additional dimensions (Lumpkin and Dess 1996). However, the earlier conceptualization using three underlying dimensions (innovativeness, proactiveness, and risk-taking) has been the most widely utilized framework of the EO construct in both the entrepreneurship and strategic management literature (Rauch et al. 2009). Thus, we focused our study on these three dimensions.

  2. We also conducted a latent methods factor test and a one-factor test on the perceptual data employed in this study. The results of these tests are available from the authors upon request. Taken together, these various tests suggest that common method bias did not pose a significant threat to this research.

References

  • Aiken, L. S., & West, S. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A. (2007). Entrepreneurial rents and the theory of the firm. Journal of Business Venturing, 22(3), 427–442.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Alvarez, S. A., & Barney, J. B. (2005). How do entrepreneurs organize firms under conditions of uncertainty? Journal of Management, 31(5), 776–793.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Andersen, T. J., Denrell, J., & Bettis, R. A. (2007). Strategic responsiveness and Bowman’s risk-return paradox. Strategic Management Journal, 28, 407–429.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atuahene-Gima, K., & Ko, A. (2001). An empirical investigation of the effect of market orientation and entrepreneurship orientation alignment on product innovation. Organization Science, 12(1), 54–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baum, J. R., Olian, J. D., Erez, M., Schnell, E. R., Smith, K. G., Sims, H. P., et al. (1993). Nationality and work role interactions: A cultural contrast of Israeli and U.S. entrepreneurs’ versus managers’ needs. Journal of Business Venturing, 8(6), 499–512.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Begley, T. M., & Boyd, D. P. (1987). Psychological characteristics associated with performance in entrepreneurial firms and smaller businesses. Journal of Business Venturing, 2, 79–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowman, E. H. (1980). A risk/return paradox for strategic management. Sloan Management Review, 21(3), 17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Branzei, O., & Vertinsky, I. (2006). Strategic pathways to product innovation capabilities in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 21(1), 75–105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brislin, R. W. (1980). Translation and content analysis of oral and written materials. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology. Boston: AllynBacon.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H. (2010). Institutional theory and entrepreneurship: Where are we now and where do we need to move in the future? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 3(34), 421–440.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cho, H.-J., & Pucik, V. (2005). Relationship between innovativeness, quality, growth, profitability, and market value. Strategic Management Journal, 26, 555–575.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. G., Green, K. M., & Slevin, D. P. (2006). Strategic process effects on the entrepreneurial orientation-sales growth rate relationships. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30(1), 57–81.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. G., & Miles, M. P. (1999). Corporate entrepreneurship and the pursuit of competitive advantage. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3), 47–63.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1989). Strategic management of small firms in hostile and benign environments. Strategic Management Journal, 10, 75–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. G., & Slevin, D. P. (1991). A conceptual model of entrepreneurship as firm behavior. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 16(1), 7–25.

    Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J. G., Slevin, D. P., & Heeley, M. B. (2000). Pioneers and followers: Competitive tactics, environment, and firm growth. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(2), 175–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Covin, J., & Wales, W. (2012). The measurement of entrepreneurial orientation. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 36(4), 677–702.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Damaraju, N. L., Barney, J., & Dess, G. (2010). Stigma and entrepreneurial risk taking. Paper presented at the Summer Conference, Imperial College London Business School, June, 2010.

  • Davidsson, P., & Wiklund, J. (2000). Conceptual and empirical challenges in the study of firm growth. In D. Sexton & H. Landstrom (Eds.), The Blackwell handbook of entrepreneurship. Oxford: Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Clercq, D., Sapienza, H. J., & Crijns, H. (2005). The internationalization of small and medium-sized firms. Small Business Economics, 24(4), 409–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dess, G. G., Ireland, R. D., Zahra, S. A., Floyd, S. W., Janney, J. J., & Lane, P. J. (2003). Emerging issues in corporate entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, 29(3), 351–378.

    Google Scholar 

  • Earley, P. C., & Gibson, C. B. (1998). Taking stock in our progress on individualism–collectivism: 100 years of solidarity and community. Journal of Management, 24(3), 265–304.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. (1989). Making fast strategic decisions in high-velocity environments. Academy of Management Journal, 27, 299–343.

    Google Scholar 

  • Folta, T. B. (2007). Uncertainty rules the day. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1(1–2), 97–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freel, M. S. (2005). Perceived environmental uncertainty and innovation in small firms. Small Business Economics, 25(1), 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gupta, A. K., & Govindarajan, V. (1984). Business unit strategy, managerial characteristics, and business unit effectiveness at strategy implementation. Academy of Management Journal, 27(1), 25–43.

    Article  Google Scholar 

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

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s consequences: International differences in work-related values. Newbury Park: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture’s consequences (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G., Noorderhaven, N. G., Thurik, A. R., Uhlaner, L. M., Wennekers, A. R. M., & Wildeman, R. E. (2004). Culture’s role in entrepreneurship: Self-employment out of dissatisfaction. In J. Ulijn & T. Brown (Eds.), Innovation, entrepreneurship and culture: The interaction between technology, progress and economic growth (pp. 162–203). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornsby, J. S., Kuratko, D. F., Shepherd, D. A., & Bott, J. P. (2009). Managers’ corporate entrepreneurial actions: Examining perception and position. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(3), 236–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hughes, M., & Morgan, R. E. (2007). Deconstructing the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and business performance at the embryonic stage of firm growth. Industrial Marketing Management, 36, 651–661.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, R. D., Covin, J. G., & Kuratko, D. F. (2009). Conceptualizing corporate entrepreneurship strategy. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(1), 19–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ireland, R. D., & Hitt, M. A. (1999). Achieving and maintaining strategic competitiveness in the 21st century: The role of strategic leadership. Academy of Management Executive, 13(1), 43–57.

    Google Scholar 

  • Khandwalla, P. N. (1977). Some top management styles, their context and performance. Organization & Administrative Sciences, 7(4), 21–51.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty, and profit. New York: Kelly and Millman, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kreiser, P. M., Marino, L., Dickson, P., & Weaver, K. M. (2010). Cultural influences on entrepreneurial orientation: The impact of national culture on risk taking and proactiveness in SMEs. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34(5), 959–983.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kreiser, P. M., Marino, L., & Weaver, K. M. (2002). Assessing the psychometric properties of the entrepreneurial orientation scale: A multi-country analysis. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(4), 71–94.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuratko, D. F. (2009). The entrepreneurial imperative of the 21st century. Business Horizons, 52(5), 421–428.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. H., Peng, M. W., & Barney, J. B. (2007). Bankruptcy law and entrepreneurship development: A real options perspective. Academy of Management Review, 32(1), 257–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, H., & Atuahene-Gima, K. (2001). Product innovation strategy and the performance of new technology ventures in China. Academy of Management Journal, 44(6), 1123–1134.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, Y., Zhao, Y., Tan, J., & Liu, Y. (2008). Moderating effects of entrepreneurial orientation on market orientation-performance linkage: Evidence from Chinese small firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 46(1), 113–133.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lieberman, M., & Montgomery, D. (1988). First-mover advantages. Strategic Management Journal, 9, 41–58.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lind, J., & Mehlum, H. (2010). With or without U? The appropriate test for a U-Shaped relationship. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 72(1), 109–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (1996). Clarifying the entrepreneurial orientation construct and linking it to performance. Academy of Management Journal, 21(1), 135–172.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lumpkin, G. T., & Dess, G. G. (2001). Linking two dimensions of entrepreneurial orientation to firm performance: The moderating role of environment and industry life cycle. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 429–451.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Makino, S., Isobe, T., & Chan, C. M. (2004). Does country matter? Strategic Management Journal, 25, 1027–1043.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marino, L., Strandholm, K., Steensma, H., & Weaver, K. (2002). The moderating effect of national culture on the relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and strategic alliance portfolio extensiveness. Entrepreneurship: Theory & Practice, 26(4), 145–160.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrath, R. G. (2001). Exploratory learning, innovative capacity, and managerial oversight. Academy of Management Journal, 44(1), 118–131.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McMillan, I. C. (1983). Preemptive strategies. Journal of Business Strategy, 4(4), 16–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (1983). The correlates of entrepreneurship in three types of firms. Management Science, 29(7), 770–791.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. (2011). Miller (1983) revisited: A reflection on EO research and some suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 873–894.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D., & Friesen, P. H. (1982). Innovation in conservative and entrepreneurial firms: Two models of strategic momentum. Strategic Management Journal, 3, 1–25.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, K. D., & Leiblein, M. J. (1996). Corporate risk-return relations: Returns variability versus downside risk. Academy of Management Journal, 39(1), 91–122.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Smith, J. R., Morse, E. A., Seawright, K. W., Peredo, A. M., & McKenzie, B. (2002). Are entrepreneurial cognitions universal? Assessing entrepreneurial cognitions across cultures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 26(4), 9–32.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Smith, J. R., Seawright, K. W., & Morse, E. A. (2000). Cross-cultural cognitions and the venture creation decision. Academy of Management Journal, 43(8), 974–993.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. H., Avila, R. A., & Allen, J. (1993). Individualism and the modern corporation: Implications for innovation and entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, 19(3), 595–612.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. H., Davis, D. L., & Allen, J. W. (1994). Fostering corporate entrepreneurship: Cross-cultural comparisons of the importance of individualism versus collectivism. Journal of International Business Studies, 25(1), 65–89.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. H., Kuratko, D. F., & Covin, J. G. (2011). Corporate Entrepreneurship & Innovation (3rd ed.). Mason: South-Western/Cengage Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morris, M. H., Kuratko, D. F., & Schindehutte, M. (2000). Triggering events, corporate entrepreneurship and the marketing function. Journal of Marketing Theory and Practice, 8(2), 18–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mueller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2001). Culture and entrepreneurial potential: A nine country study of locus of control and innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 51–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy, G. B., Trailer, J. W., & Hill, R. C. (1996). Measuring performance in entrepreneurship research. Journal of Business Research, 36(1), 15–24.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neter, J., Wasserman, W., & Kutner, M. H. (1990). Applied linear statistical models. Homewood: Irwin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pakes, A. (1985). On patents, R&D, and the stock market rate of return. Journal of Political Economy, 93(2), 390–409.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Palmer, T. B., & Wiseman, R. M. (1999). Decoupling risk taking from income stream uncertainty: A holistic model of risk. Strategic Management Journal, 20(11), 1037–1062.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pinillos, M. J., & Reyes, L. (2011). Relationship between individualist-collectivist culture and entrepreneurial activity: Evidence from Global Entrepreneurship Monitor data. Small Business Economics, 37(1), 23–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qian, G., & Li, L. (2003). Profitability of small- and medium-sized enterprises in high-tech industries: The case of the biotechnology industry. Strategic Management Journal, 24(9), 881–887.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rauch, A., Wiklund, J., Lumpkin, G. T., & Frese, M. (2009). Entrepreneurial orientation and business performance: An assessment of past research and suggestions for the future. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 33(3), 761–787.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Roberts, P. W. (1999). Product innovation, product-market competition and persistent profitability in the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Strategic Management Journal, 20(7), 655–670.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, K. C., & McDougall, P. P. (2001). Entry barriers and new venture performance: A comparison of universal and contingency approaches. Strategic Management Journal, 22, 659–685.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbusch, N., Brinkmann, J., & Bausch, A. (2011). Is innovation always beneficial? A meta-analysis of the relationship between innovation and performance in SMEs. Journal of Business Venturing, 26, 441–457.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sasabuchi, S. (1980). A test of a multivariate normal mean with composite hypotheses determined by linear inequalities. Biometrika, 67, 429–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, R., Slevin, D.P. & Covin, J.G. (1995). The strategic management profile: An executive questionnaire. Unpublished questionnaire, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh.

  • Shepherd, D. A., Covin, J. G., & Kuratko, D. F. (2009). Project failure from corporate entrepreneurship: Managing the grief process. Journal of Business Venturing, 24(6), 588–600.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short, J. C., Broberg, J. C., Cogliser, C. C., & Brigham, K. H. (2010). Construct validation using computer-aided text analysis. Organizational Research Methods, 13(2), 320–347.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Short, J. C., McKelvie, A., Ketchen, D., & Chandler, G. N. (2009). Firm and industry effects on firm performance: A generalization and extension for new ventures. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 3, 47–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Smith, K., & Cao, Q. (2007). An entrepreneurial perspective on the firm-environment relationship. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal, 1, 329–344.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stam, W., & Elfring, T. (2008). Entrepreneurial orientation and new venture performance: The moderating role of intra- and extraindustry social capital. Academy of Management Journal, 51(1), 97–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Steensma, H. K., Marino, L., Weaver, K. M., & Dickson, P. H. (2000). The influence of national culture on the formation of technology alliances by entrepreneurial firms. Academy of Management Journal, 43(5), 951–973.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stopford, J. M., & Baden-Fuller, C. W. F. (1990). Creating corporate entrepreneurship. Strategic Management Journal, 15(7), 521–537.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su, Z., Xie, E., & Li, Y. (2011). Entrepreneurial orientation and firm performance in new ventures and established firms. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(4), 558–577.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, Z., & Tang, J. (2012). Entrepreneurial orientation and SME performance in China’s changing environment: The moderating effects of strategies. Asia Pacific Journal of Management, 29, 409–431.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tang, J., Tang, Z., Marino, L. D., Zhang, Y., & Li, Q. (2008). Exploring an inverted U-shape relationship between entrepreneurial orientation and performance in Chinese ventures. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32(1), 219–239.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M. Z., & Wilson, S. (2012). Does culture still matter?: The effects of individualism on national innovation rates. Journal of Business Venturing, 27(2), 234–247.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terziovski, M. (2010). Innovation practice and its performance implications in small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in the manufacturing sector: A resource-based view. Strategic Management Journal, 31(8), 892–902.

    Google Scholar 

  • Thurik, A. R., & Wennekers, S. (2004). Entrepreneurship, small business and economic growth. Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, 11(1), 140–149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tiessen, J. H. (1997). Individualism, collectivism, and entrepreneurship: A framework for international comparative research. Journal of Business Venturing, 12(5), 367–384.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Triandis, H. C., & Suh, E. M. (2002). Cultural influences on personality. Annual Review of Psychology, 53(1), 133–160.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tsui, A. S., Nifadkar, S. S., & Ou, A. Y. (2007). Cross-national, cross-cultural organizational behavior research: Advances, gaps, and recommendations. Journal of Management, 33(3), 426–478.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Venkatraman, N. (1989). Strategic orientation of business enterprises: The construct dimensionality, and measurement. Management Science, 35(8), 942–962.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wales, W. J., Patel, P. C., Parida, V. & Kreiser, P. M. (In Press). Non-linear effects of entrepreneurial orientation on small firm performance: The moderating role of resource orchestration capabilities. Strategic Entrepreneurship Journal.

  • Wiersma, E. (2007). Conditions that shape the learning curve: Factors that increase the ability and opportunity to learn. Management Science, 53(12), 1903–1915.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., Patzelt, H., & Shepherd, D. A. (2009). Building an integrative model of small business growth. Small Business Economics, 32(4), 351–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. A. (2005). Entrepreneurial orientation and small business performance: A configurational approach. Journal of Business Venturing, 20(1), 71–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiklund, J., & Shepherd, D. (2011). Where to from here? EO as experimentation, failure, and distribution of outcomes. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 35(5), 925–946.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wright, P., Kroll, M., Pray, B., & Lado, A. (1995). Strategic orientations, competitive advantage, and business performance. Journal of Business Research, 33, 143–151.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A. (1996). Technology strategy and financial performance: Examining the moderating role of the firm’s competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 11(3), 189–219.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., & Bogner, W. C. (2000). Technology strategy and software new ventures’ performance: Exploring the moderating effect of the competitive environment. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(2), 135–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Hayton, J. C., & Salvato, C. (2004). Entrepreneurship in family vs. non-family firms: A resource-based analysis of the effect of organizational culture. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 28(4), 363–381.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zahra, S. A., Nielsen, A. P., & Bogner, W. C. (1999). Corporate entrepreneurship, knowledge, and competence development. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 23(3), 169–189.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Business, Ohio University, 304 Copeland Hall, Athens, OH, 45701, USA

    Patrick M. Kreiser

  2. Culverhouse College of Commerce and Business Administration, The University of Alabama, Box 870225, Tuscaloosa, AL, 35487, USA

    Louis D. Marino

  3. Department of Management & Entrepreneurship, Kelley School of Business, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA

    Donald F. Kuratko

  4. Mitchell College of Business, The University of South Alabama, 230 MCOB, Mobile, AL, 36688, USA

    K. Mark Weaver

Authors
  1. Patrick M. Kreiser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Louis D. Marino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Donald F. Kuratko
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. K. Mark Weaver
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Donald F. Kuratko.

Additional information

A previous version of this manuscript was awarded the Wesley J. Howe Award for Excellence on the Topic of Corporate Entrepreneurship at the Babson Entrepreneurship Research Conference. A condensed version of the paper was published in Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research (FER).

Electronic supplementary material

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 15 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kreiser, P.M., Marino, L.D., Kuratko, D.F. et al. Disaggregating entrepreneurial orientation: the non-linear impact of innovativeness, proactiveness and risk-taking on SME performance. Small Bus Econ 40, 273–291 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-012-9460-x

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-012-9460-x

Keywords

JEL Classifications

Search

Navigation