Institutions, human capital and entrepreneurial orientation: implications for growth policy

Thanti Mthanti · Kalu Ojah

21 citations0/0 files storedJournal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences Economic Growth and Productivity Culture, Economy, and Development Studies

Abstract

Purpose The purpose of this paper is to establish a more robust empirical support for the long established postulation by Adam Smith and Joseph Schumpeter that human capital and institutions enable Schumpeterian entrepreneurship, which, in turn, facilitates economic growth. Design/methodology/approach Adopting entrepreneurial orientation (EO) (i.e. innovativeness, proactiveness and risk taking; Mthanti and Ojah, 2017, Research Policy, 46:4, pp. 724-739) as the measure of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship at the macro-level, and using a sample of 93 countries, over 1980-2008, the authors employ system Generalised Method of Moments to investigate institutions and human capital as possible determinants of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship (EO). Findings The authors find that the human capital-EO nexus is robust across economic development levels. However, there is a cross-country variation in the institutions-EO nexus. In line with theoretical predictions, institutions indeed drive EO in middle-to-high-income countries. However, in low-income countries, building institutions in order to foster EO yields perverse outcomes, which, for us and especially based on deeper analysis, suggest that improving the quality of institutions may not be a necessary precondition for EO/growth policy in low-income countries. Furthermore, the authors find that EO is a highly persistent series, with self-reinforcing network effects, i.e. lofty EO behaviour encourages more lofty EO behaviour. Research limitations/implications Drivers of macro EO are erroneously taken as of growth. This empirical analysis corrects the sequencing. Practical implications Policy practice must acknowledge macro-EO importantly has both direct and indirect growth effects. Originality/value This study is the first to empirically test the theoretical sequence between drivers of growth/EO and economic growth.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 21 citations exist upstream.

References

1998Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models 1995Initial conditions and moment restrictions in dynamic panel data models 1776An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations 1996Clarifying the Entrepreneurial Orientation Construct and Linking It To Performance 2009How to do Xtabond2: An Introduction to Difference and System GMM in Stata 1997Legal Determinants of External Finance 1995Corruption and Growth 1996Financial Dependence and Growth

Cited by

2020Human capital, institutional economics and entrepreneurship as a driver for quality & sustainable economic growth 2020INTANGIBLE RESOURCES AND INSTITUTION PERFORMANCE: THE CONCERN OF INTELLECTUAL CAPITAL, EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE, JOB SATISFACTION, AND ITS IMPACT ON ORGANIZATION PERFORMANCE 2019Does the organizational climate predict the innovation in sports clubs?2024Context really matters: why do women artisans in the Peruvian context avoid the sole ownership of their enterprises?2021Measurement of Entrepreneurial Orientation: A Systematic Critical Synthesis of the Empirical Literature

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.