BazEkon - Biblioteka Główna Uniwersytetu Ekonomicznego w Krakowie

BazEkon home page

Meny główne

Autor
Crudu Rodica (Academy of Economic Studies of Moldova)
Tytuł
The Role of Innovative Entrepreneurship in the Economic Development of EU Member Countries
Źródło
Journal of Entrepreneurship, Management and Innovation (JEMI), 2019, vol. 15, nr 1, s. 35-60, tab., wykr., aneks, bibliogr. s. 54-57
Tytuł własny numeru
Towards Success in a Competitive Market: The Importance of Entrepreneurship and Innovation
Słowa kluczowe
Innowacje, Przedsiębiorczość, Wzrost gospodarczy, Zakładanie przedsiębiorstwa
Innovations, Entrepreneurship, Economic growth, Establishment of a company
Uwagi
Klasyfikacja JEL: O10, O11, O30, O52
streszcz., summ., The contribution of Dr. Rodica Crudu to this paper was supported by the project Jean Monnet Chair in EU Policies towards Innovation, Creativity and Entrepreneurship/ EU2INNO, ref. nr. 2016/2332-574680-EPP-1-2016-1MD-EPPJMO-CHAIR, co-funded by the Erasmus+ Programme of the European Union.
Firma/Organizacja
Unia Europejska (UE)
European Union (EU)
Abstrakt
W literaturze specjalistycznej uznano, że przedsiębiorczość odgrywa istotną rolę w napędzaniu innowacji, wzrostu gospodarczego i dobrobytu, a także wpływa na tworzenie miejsc pracy. Badacze wyrażali różne poglądy na temat związku między rozwojem gospodarczym a przedsiębiorczością w czasie. Uważa się również, że innowacje są siłą napędową rozwoju gospodarczego narodów. Dlatego też innowacyjna przedsiębiorczość zaczęta być uważana za kluczowy czynnik nowoczesnego rozwoju gospodarczego. Na przykład MŚP i innowacje leżą u podstaw strategii rozwoju Unii Europejskiej - strategii "Europa 2020". Celem artykułu jest analiza roli innowacyjnej przedsiębiorczości w rozwoju gospodarczym państw członkowskich UE. Biorąc pod uwagę, że oba procesy: rozwój gospodarczy i innowacyjna przedsiębiorczość sq wielopłaszczyznowe, artykuł przedstawia związek między tymi dwoma fenomenami a ich specyfiką w krajach członkowskich UE. Biorąc pod uwagę charakter współczesnego przeglądu literatury i określony cel badawczy, w niniejszym artykule przetestowano model, który obejmuje nowe lub młode i innowacyjne firmy, jako aspekty innowacyjnej przedsiębiorczości i determinanty tempa wzrostu gospodarczego. Zastosowana metoda badawcza to analiza modelu regresyjnego. Do analizy i przetwarzania danych statystycznych wykorzystano narzędzia programów Stata i SPSS. Najważniejsze wnioski z tej pracy pokazują, że innowacyjni przedsiębiorcy (mierzeni poziomem innowacji we wczesnej fazie przedsiębiorczości (TEA)) są bardziej obecni w krajach o wyższym poziomie rozwoju i wyższych dochodach, motywowani przez możliwości poprawy, które widzą w byciu przedsiębiorcami. Jednak wyższy stopień przedsiębiorczości, zwłaszcza tworzenie nowych firm, nie przyczynia się znacząco do przyspieszonego rozwoju gospodarczego. Wyjaśnia to zmienność motywacji (konieczność lub zorientowanie na poprawę) przedsiębiorców w krajach UE. W krajach rozwiniętych, przedsiębiorcy najprawdopodobniej są typem Schumpetera, podczas gdy w krajach rozwijających się większość z nich to właściciele sklepów. W związku z tym uważa się, że państwa członkowskie UE potrzebują bardziej przyjaznej i skutecznej polityki tworzenia nowych firm, a także narzędzi wspierających MŚP. Artykuł ma istotne praktyczne implikacje dla władz i decydentów w zakresie możliwych kierunków rozwoju innowacyjnej polityki przedsiębiorczości. (abstrakt oryginalny)

In the specialized literature, entrepreneurship has been acknowledged to have a salient role in driving innovation, economic growth, and welfare, in addition to its effect on job creation. Researchers have expressed different views about the relationship between economic development and entrepreneurship throughout time. It is also considered that innovation is a driving force in the economic development of nations. Therefore, innovative entrepreneurship started to be considered a key factor in modern economic development. For instance, SMEs and innovation lay at the core of the European Union's development strategy - Europe 2020 strategy. The aim of the article is to analyze the role of innovative entrepreneurship in the economic development of EU member states. Taking into consideration that both processes: economic development and innovative entrepreneurship are multifaceted, the article comes to express the relationship between the two phenomena and its specifics in EU member countries. Given the nature of contemporary highlights of the literature review and the stated research objective, in this article, a model was tested that captures the new or young and innovative firms, as aspects of innovative entrepreneurship and determinants of the economic growth rates. The research method used is regression model analysis. For the statistical data analysis and processing, Stata and SPSS software tools were used. The key findings of the paper show that innovative entrepreneurs (being measured by the Total Early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) innovation level) are more present in countries with higher development levels and higher incomes, being motivated by the improvement opportunity they see in becoming entrepreneurs. However, a higher degree of entrepreneurship, especially new firms' creation, does not substantially contribute to accelerated economic development. This is explained by the variation in the motivation (necessity or improvement oriented) entrepreneurs across EU countries. In the developed countries, the entrepreneurs are most likely to be the Schumpeterian type, while in developing countries most of them are shopkeepers. Consequently, it is clear that EU member countries need friendlier and more efficient new firms' creation policies, as well as SME supporting tools. The paper has significant practical implications for decision and policy-making authorities in terms of possible directions for innovative entrepreneurship policy development. (original abstract)
Pełny tekst
Pokaż
Bibliografia
Pokaż
  1. Acs, Z.J., Åstebro, T., Audretsch, D., & Robinson, D.T. (2016). Public policy to promote entrepreneurship: A call to arms. Small Business Economics, 47(1), 1-17.
  2. Acs, Z.J., Audretsch, D.B., & Lehmann, E.E. (2013). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 41(4), 757-774.
  3. Acs, Z.J., Braunerhjelm, P., Audretsch, D., & Carlsson, B. (2009). The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 32(1), 15-30.
  4. Acs, Z.J., & Armington, C. (2004). Employment growth and entrepreneurial activity in cities. Regional Studies, 38(8), 911-27.
  5. Acs, Z.J., & Armington, C. (2003). Endogenous growth and entrepreneurial activity in cities. Washington DC: Center for Economic Studies, U.S. Bureau of the Census, CES 03-02.
  6. Aghion, Ph., & Howitt, P. (1992). A model of growth through creative destruction. Econometrica, 60(2), 323-51.
  7. Andreeva, E.L., Simon, H., Karkh, D.A., & Glukhikh, P.L. (2016). Innovative entrepreneurship: A source of economic growth in the region. Ekonomika Regiona (Economy of Region), 12(3), 899-910.
  8. Anvert, M., Granieri, M., & Renda, A. (July 2010). A new approach to innovation policy in the European Union. Innovation policy: Boosting EU competitiveness in a global economy. CEPS Task Force Report. Retrieved from http://aei.pitt.edu/14482/
  9. Audretsch, D.B., Bönte, W., & Keilbach, M. (2008). Entrepreneurship capital and its impact on knowledge diffusion and economic performance. Journal of Business Venturing, 23(6), 687-698.
  10. Audretsch, D.B., & Fritsch, M. (2002). Growth regimes over time and space. Regional Studies, 36, 113-124.
  11. Audretsch, D.B., & Thurik, R. (2000). Capitalism and Democracy in the 21st Century: From the Managed to the Entrepreneurial Economy. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10(1), 17-34.
  12. Audretsch, D.B. (1995). Innovation and Industry Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
  13. Barro, R. (1990). Government spending in a simple model of endogenous growth. Journal of Political Economy, 82(6), 1095-1117.
  14. Barro, R. (1991). Economic growth in a cross-section of countries. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 106, 407-44.
  15. Blanchflower, D.G. (2000). Self-employment in OECD countries. Labour Economics, 7, 471-505.
  16. Birch, D.L. (1987). Job Creation in America: How Our Smallest Companies Put the Most People to Work. New York: Free Press.
  17. Block, J.H., Fisch, C.O., & van Praag, M. (2017). The Schumpeterian entrepreneur: A review of the empirical evidence on the antecedents, behaviour and consequences of innovative entrepreneurship. Industry and Innovation, 24(1), 61-95.
  18. Cameron, G. (1996) Innovation and economic growth. CEPDP (277). Centre for Economic Performance. London, UK: London School of Economics and Political Science.
  19. Carree, M.A., & Thurik, A.R. (2008). The lag structure of the impact of business ownership on economic performance in OECD countries. Small Business Economics, 30(1), 101-110.
  20. Carree, M.A., van Stel, A., Thurik, A.R., & Wennekers, S. (2007). The relationship between economic development and business ownership revisited. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 19, 281-291.
  21. Caves, R.E. (1998). Industrial organization and new findings on the turnover and mobility of firms. Journal of Economic Literature, 36, 1947-1982.
  22. Crudu, R. (2017). The role of innovation and creativity in shaping the future of EU. Proceedings of the International Conference on European Financial Regulation (pp. 202-214), Alexandru Ioan Cuza University of Iasi, 18-20 May 2017. Retrieved from http://eufire.uaic.ro/wp- content/uploads/2017/08/volum_EUFIRE_2017_docx.pdf
  23. Davidsson, P. (2003). The domain of entrepreneurship research: Some suggestions. In J. A. Katz & D. Shepherd (Eds.), Cognitive Approaches to Entrepreneurship Research. Advances in Entrepreneurship, Firm Emergence and Growth (pp. 315-372). UK: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.
  24. Dolfsma, W., van der Velde, D. (2014). Industry innovativeness, firm size, and entrepreneurship: Schumpeter Mark III?. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 24(4), 713-736.
  25. ECD. (2009). Innovation within companies. OECD Science, Technology and Industry Scoreboard 2009. OECD Publishing. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/sti_scoreboard-2009-40-en
  26. European Commission. (2015). Promoting Entrepreneurship. Retrieved from http://ec.europa.eu/growth/smes/promoting-entrepreneurship/index_en.htm
  27. Eurostat. (2017). National accounts and GDP: Statistics explained. Retrieved 12 November, 2017
  28. Evans, D.S., & Leighton L.S. (1989). Some empirical aspects of entrepreneurship. American Economic Review, 79, 519-535.
  29. Fagerberg, J., Mowery, D.C., & Nelson, R. (2009). (Eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Innovation. Oxford: Oxford University Press. http://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199286805.001.0001
  30. Folster, St. (2000). Do entrepreneurs create jobs? Small Business Economics, 14(2), 137-48.
  31. Fritsch, M., & Pamela, M. (2004). Effects of new business formation on regional development over time. Regional Studies, 38(8), 961-75.
  32. Haltiwanger, J., Jarmin, R.S., & Miranda, J. (2013). Who creates jobs? Small versus large versus young. Review of Economics and Statistics, 95(2), 347-361.
  33. Henrekson, M., & Johansson, D. (2010). Gazelles as job creators: A survey and interpretation of the evidence. Small Business Economics, 35(2), 227-244.
  34. Holmes, T.J., & Schmitz, J.A. (1990). A theory of entrepreneurship and its application to the study of business transfers. Journal of Political Economy, 98, 265-294.
  35. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor - 2016-17. Executive Report [online]. London, UK: Babson College, London Business School, Universidad del Desarrollo, Universiti Tun Abdul Razak, Tecnológico de Monterrey. Retrieved from https://www.gemconsortium.org/report/49812
  36. Griliches, Z. (1990). Patent statistics as economic indicators: A survey. Journal of Economic Literature, 28, 1661-1707.
  37. Koellinger, P. (2008). Why are some entrepreneurs more innovative than others? Small Business Economics, 31(1), 21-37.
  38. Kressel, H., & Lento, T.V. (2012). Entrepreneurship in the Global Economy: Engine for Economic Growth. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  39. Low, S.A, & Isserman, A.M. (2015). Where are the innovative entrepreneurs? Identifying innovative industries and measuring innovative entrepreneurship. International Regional Science Review, 38(2), 171-20.
  40. Lucas, R. (1988). On the mechanics of economic development. Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 3-42.
  41. Naudé, W. (Ed.) (2011). Entrepreneurship and Economic Development, New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
  42. Neumark, D., Wall, B., & Zhang, J. (2011). Do small businesses create more jobs? New evidence for the United States from the national establishment time series. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 93(1), 16-29.
  43. Peris-Ortiza, M., Ferreirab, J.M., & Fernandesc, C.I. (2017). Do total early-stage entrepreneurial activities (teas) foster innovative practices in OECD countries? Technological Forecasting & Social Change., 129, 176-184. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2017.07.005
  44. Pontus, B., Acs, Z.J., Audretsch, D., & Carlsson, B. (2010). The missing link: Knowledge diffusion and entrepreneurship in endogenous growth. Small Business Economics, 34(2), 105- 125.
  45. Romer, P. (1986). Increasing returns and long run growth. Journal of Political Economy, 94, 1002-37.
  46. Romer, P. (1990). Endogenous technological change. Journal of Political Economy, 98, S71-S102.
  47. Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press.
  48. Shane, S.A. (2003). A General Theory of Entrepreneurship. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  49. Shane, S. (Ed.). 2005. Economic Development through Entrepreneurship. Government, University and Business Linkages. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
  50. Shane, S. (2009). Why encouraging more people to become entrepreneurs is bad public policy. Small Business Economics, 33(2), 141-149.
  51. Solow, R.M. (1956). A contribution to the theory of economic growth. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 70, 65-94.
  52. Sutton, J. (1997). Gibrat's legacy. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 40-59.
  53. Szabo, Z.K., & Herman, E. (2012). Innovative entrepreneurship for economic development in EU. Procedia Economics and Finance, 3, 268 - 275.
  54. Uppenberg, K. (2009). Innovation and economic growth. EIB Papers, 14(1), 10-35.
  55. van Praag, C.M., & Versloot, P.H. (2007). What is the value of entrepreneurship? A review of recent research. Small Business Economics, 29(4), 351-382.
  56. Welter, F., & Lasch, F. (2008). Entrepreneurship research in Europe: Taking stock and looking forward. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 32, 241-248.
  57. Wennekers, S., & Thurik, R. (1999). Linking entrepreneurship and economic growth. Small Business Economics, 13(1), 27-56.
  58. Wennekers, S., van Wennekers, A., Thurik, R., & Reynolds, P. (2005). Nascent entrepreneurship and the level of economic development. Small Business Economics, 24(3), 293-309.
  59. Wong, P.K., Ping, H.Y., & Erkko, A. (2005). Entrepreneurship, innovation and economic growth: Evidence from GEM data. Small Business Economics, 24 (3), 335-350.
Cytowane przez
Pokaż
ISSN
2299-7075
Język
eng
URI / DOI
https://doi.org/10.7341/20191512
Udostępnij na Facebooku Udostępnij na Twitterze Udostępnij na Google+ Udostępnij na Pinterest Udostępnij na LinkedIn Wyślij znajomemu