GEM Research
Niels Bosma
GEM Annual Meeting 2012
GEM Research and the Academic Community
•
The GEM consortium: a collection of enthusiastic academics building
unique datasets
– Monitoring entrepreneurship worldwide since 1999
– Data publicly available, standardized procedures
– Increasing number of participating countries
– Increasing number of academic publications
•
However
– GEM cannot answer all questions – although sometimes there seems to
be an expectation that it should
– Some questions should simply not be answered using GEM data
– Many GEM members have limited time available for academic research
•
The following slides are based on Amorós, Bosma and Levie (2012) and…
– Highlight the academic contribution of GEM to the research field
– Identify particular areas that GEM data can be used in the near future
– Call for more research collaborations to make the step to the next level
GEM APS Methodology and its strengths and
limitations for entrepreneurship research
• Strengths:
– Cross-national (and regional) comparisons
– Focus on individuals, allowing to discern
• Types and phases of entrepreneurship
• Entrepreneurial attitudes, activity and aspirations
– Growing dataset allows more sophisticated empirical analysis
• Limitations
– Cross-sectional data (unlike e.g. PSED)
– Limited sample of entrepreneurs within countries – notable
exceptions: Spain, United Kingdom, Chile, Germany
– Simple structure of the surveys is needed for cross-national
comparison but makes it more difficult to provide adequate
measures of particular theoretical constructs.
The GEM Objectives
• To measure differences in the level of
entrepreneurial activity among countries
• To uncover factors determining national levels of
entrepreneurial activity
• To identify policies that lead to appropriate
national levels of entrepreneurial activity
Achieving the three GEM objectives would help
establish how entrepreneurship relates to
economic growth and well-being.
Waves of GEM-based research over time
• First wave: country studies, country comparisons, determinants of
(early-stage) entrepreneurial activity.
 National comparisons of nascent entrepreneurship and earlystage entrepreneurial activity (GEM’s 1st objective).
 First linkages with growth although time dimension is limited
• Second wave: data based on more years of observations, combining
GEM with other datasets
 More knowledge on determinants of (types and phases of)
entrepreneurship (GEM’s 2nd objective)
• Third wave: increasing number of time observations, variance of
countries, more advanced methods
 Grasping policy effects increasingly possible (GEM’s 3rd
objective)
 More information on developing and emerging countries
 Allows more reliable links with economic development
 Regional differentiation
Theoretical perspectives adopted in the papers
Solow/Romer growth theories, Human capital theory, psychology and sociology, Network
theory, human capital theory, Network theory, agglomeration theory, regional growth
theory, Schumpeter Mark I and II, structural transformation, stages of economic
development, Stages of economic development, managed vs. entrepreneurial
economies, Endogenous theory of economic growth, new economic geography, Social
psychological theory of planned action , Economic theory on household portfolios,
Human capital theory, Labour economists, social psychology and sociology,
Internalization theory, knowledge spillovers, Occupational choice literature, migration
theory, Eclectic framework of entrepreneurship, Industrial organization, pecking order
theory, Labour economics, displacement theory, Entrepreneurship, psychology and
sociology, Opportunity recognition, growth theory, Pecking order theory, finance gap
literature, transition economies, Opportunity recognition, Stages of economic
development, institutions, Opportunity recognition , creative destruction, productive
entrepreneurship, Knowledge spillovers, absorptive capacity, stages of economic
development, institutions, Institutional theory, entrepreneurial motivation, Institutional
theory, Behavioural Economics, Institutional theory, Political economics, strategic
management, Social capital theory, Kirznerian´s opportunity perception.
Source: Amoros, Bosma & Levie (forthcoming)
Investigating Determinants of
Entrepreneurship
•
•
From macro environment to micro-level decisions: a multilevel phenomenon
– should be acknowledged in research methodology
What has been investigated to date (macro-micro & macro-macro)? Some
examples
– The importance of perceptions (e.g. Arenius and Minniti 2005)
– Characteristics of types of entrepreneurs (e.g. Koellinger 2009)
– Characteristics along the entrepreneurial process (Brixy et al. 2011)
– Gender studies (e.g. Verheul et al. 2006; Langowitz & Minniti 2007;
Wagner 2007)
– Clusters (Rocha and Sternberg 2007)
– Role of Economic development (Wennekers et al. 2005)
– Culture / Social Norms (Kwon and Arenius 2010; Stephan and Uhlaner
2010)
– Intellectual Property Rights (Autio and Acs 2010)
– Financial and Educational systems, (DeClercq et al 2011)
Linking Entrepreneurship to Economic
Development
• Wennekers et al (2010): overview article – stress
importance of discerning types of entrepreneurship
• Some other GEM-based output: Wong et al (2005); Van
Stel et al. (2005); Acs and Varga (2005); Acs and
Amoros (2008); Valiere and Peterson (2009); Hessels
and Van Stel (2009); Bosma (2011)
 After a decade of data collection, a business cycle with
ups and downs, GEM arrives at a point where
breakthrough papers can be anticipated
 However, better supporting theoretical models are
required.
GEM-based publications in selected
entrepreneurship journals, 2005-2010
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Small Business Economics (30)
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice (4)
Journal of Busines Venturing (3)
Entrepreneurship and Regional Development (3)
International Small Business Journal (4)
Journal of International Business Studies (2)
Strategic Entreprenership Journal (1)
Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship (2)
GEM-Based articles: what have we learned
• Small Business Economics’ three special issue have been important
for GEM
– Reynolds et al (2005) article: now already in top 5 cited articles
of the journal – GEM certainly increasingly recognized
• Investigating determinants of entrepreneurship
– Uneven coverage
– Using both NES and secondary sources
– NES data used a.o. in two JIBS and one ETP publication
• Linking entrepreneurship to growth: sufficient attention but no clearcut evidence yet….
• So far relatively limited attention is paid to explaining
– Entrepreneurial perceptions, start-up intentions
– owner-managers of (types of) established businesses
– business discontinuations and reasons of exit
– informal investment
Some research areas where GEM data could
be used well
•
•
•
•
•
•
Entrepreneurship and Development
Entrepreneurship and the Business Cycle
Baumol’s ‘E-constant’ proposition
Adopting advanced methods
Further regional analysis
…
The Role of Entrepreneurship in Developing
Countries
• Findings to date still rather limited
• Naudé and colleagues from UNU-Wider do some interesting work
(e.g. Naudé et al. 2008; Gries and Naudé 2008)
• GEM increasingly equipped for tackling this issue
– GEM Model: different conditions required in different stages of
economic development
– Evidence for transition countries (Aidis et al. 2008; Acs and
Amoros 2008; Valliere and Peterson 2009)
– Number of developing/transition countries participating in GEM is
increasing rapidly  more opportunities (also for ‘development’
journals)
Baumol’s Proposition and GEM Evidence
•
Baumol (1990): number of individuals with entrepreneurial behavior is
similar across countries, but set of rules and norms decide how this
behavior is channeled (productive-unproductive-destructive)
1. Implications for national entrepreneurship rates
– GEM confirms a wide variety in entrepreneurial prevalence rates
– However, TEA (and established business ownership) is not all there is;
examples of additional types of entrepreneurial activity include
• Entrepreneurial Employee Activity
• Social Entrepreneurship
2. Emphasizing the role of institutions for the quality of entrepreneurship;
examples:
– IPR protection (Autio & Acs 2010)
– Education & Training (Levie and Autio 2007; Bowen & DeClercq 2008;
DeClercq et al 2011)
– Social security / job protection /unemployment benefits (Van Stel et al
2008; Bosma 2009; koellinger & Minniti 2009)
– Regulatory and legal regimes (Levie and Autio 2011)
Methodologies: highlighting two techniques
particularly appropriate to GEM
• Panel Data Analysis
– For country x time analysis  GMM techniques appropriate if
number of years is limited (Arrelano & Bond 1998)
– Applications: impact (types and phases of) entrepreneurship on
growth, analysis impact EFC’s on entrepreneurship
• Multilevel Analysis
– Acknowledges that individuals in groups/regions/country do not
act independently from each other – random intercepts for
groups/regions/countries
– Allows effects of “lower level units” to vary across “higher level
units” – random slopes. E.g. The effect of the individual’s
education level on involvement in nascent entrepreneurship
differs across countries (with specific characteristics)
Call for more collaborations
• Many GEM National Team members lack the
time for writing academic papers
• Plenty opportunities to form research
partnerships
• Learn from existing work and most recent
papers. See new GEM working paper series
• More emphasis on theoretical sections, GEMbased empirical analysis remains an application
– Work together on theoretical underpinnings
Institutionalizing GEM Research Development
• Role of the Research Committee
– Past years’
• 2005-2008: focus on data quality issues
• 2009-2011: simplify APS (modular) structure, implementation
of special topics, improve documentation
• 2012+ : fly out!  focus on academic advances
– Lots of great ideas (work group yesterday)
– Resources now available
– Recognition from the GERA board
– Requires rethinking of the Research Committe’s role
Formalizing the GEM Research Committee
• Ensure stability and dynamics
• Propose to have a fresh start in 2012
– Those interested to serve may apply
•
•
•
•
Give resume
Make your ideas known
Invitations will be emailed shortly
Current members need to re-apply
– A committee will be installed to assign the new RC
committee; diversity preferred
• Members, in principle, serve for three years
• One leader from GERA, one assigned board
member
Thanks to members of the past years!
First tier (regular meetings):
• Ernesto Amoros (Chile), Erkko Autio (UK), Alicia Coduras (Spain),
Ehud Menipaz (Israel), Nezam Faghih (Iran), Thomas Schøtt
(Denmark), Yana Litovsky, Jeff Seaman
The second tier (those occasionally consulted):
• Zoltan Acs (Hungary), Pia Arenius (Finland), Girjanauth Boodraj
(Jamaica), Gianni Chocce (Chile), Esra Karadeniz (Turkey), Virginia
Lasio (Ecuador), Jonathan Levie (UK), Maria Minniti (Co-ordination),
Olga Obraztsova (Russia), Joseph Onochie (US), Rolf Sternberg
(Germany), Hugh Thomas (Hong Kong), Sander Wennekers
(Netherlands)
GEM Working Paper Series
• http://logec.repec.org/scripts/seriesstat.pf?item=r
epec:gem:wpaper
GEM Spain – International Research Workshop
• San Sebastian-Donostia, Spain, next July 19th
• Special focus on Entrepreneurial Employee
Activity / Intrapreneurship
IDRC – Networks Research Collaboration