Suchergebnisse

Schon Ende der 80er Jahre stellten vorsichtige Prognosen fest, dass 30 bis 40 Millionen Menschen vom Land in die Stadt ziehen müssen, wenn China in den nächsten zwei Jahrzehnten gute wirtschaftliche Leistungen erbringen will. Dieser notwendige Wanderungsprozess wurde als "Große Migration" bezeichnet. Der Autor rekonstruiert die Entwicklung seitdem und kommt zu dem Schluss, dass der Staat den Weg zu einer Regulierung der Migration durch den Markt freigeben sollte. Erst dann könne das Land seine ganze wirtschaftliche Kraft entfalten.Der Höhepunkt für diese "Große Migration" ist gegenwärtig erreicht. Die Migration ländlicher Arbeitskräfte ist in eine neue Phase eingetreten. Es ist damit zu rechnen, dass bis zu 50 Prozent der ländlichen Bevölkerung in die Städte wandern werden. Allerdings erweist sich die wachsende Arbeitslosigkeit als drängendes soziales Problem. Wenn die Gesamtzahl der auf dem Lande überflüssig werdenden Landarbeiter in den nächsten 10 Jahren auf - wie erwartet wird - 250 bis 270 Millionen steigt, wird die Arbeitsmigration das Land vor völlig neue Probleme stellen. (ICA2)

AbstractManuscript TypeEmpiricalResearch Question/IssueWhat is the impact of entrepreneurship on GDP/capita, unemployment, exports/GDP, and patents per population across countries? Is the impact of entrepreneurship mitigated by legal and cultural differences across countries? Do different international datasets provide different answers to these questions? We empirically compare the impact of entrepreneurship on GDP/capita, unemployment, exports/GDP, and patents per population across countries by examining three datasets from the World Bank, the OECD, and Compendia.Research Findings/InsightsBased on a comprehensive sample of all available countries and years, with the World Bank data being the most comprehensive, we find entrepreneurship has a significantly positive impact on GDP/capita, exports/GDP, and patents per population, and a negative impact on unemployment. Inferences from the Compendia data are very consistent. By contrast, inferences from the OECD data are not supportive of any of these propositions.Theoretical/Academic ImplicationsOur findings point to institutional and cultural impediments to the effectiveness of entrepreneurship. Most notably, the impact of entrepreneurship is significantly mitigated by excessively strong creditor rights that limit entrepreneurial risk‐taking. Furthermore, the data indicate that cultural attitudes associated with low risk‐taking limit the effectiveness of entrepreneurship. By contrast, the impact of entrepreneurship on exports/GDP does not appear to be directly tied to costs of exporting, which is perhaps best explained by the new economy goods and services created by entrepreneurs that depend less on such costs. For some subsets of the data we find evidence consistent with the view that top tier venture capital funds enhance the impact of entrepreneurship on GDP/capita. Finally, our results show how different definitions of new business entry matter for empirical analysis of entrepreneurship across countries.Practitioner/Policy ImplicationsThe data highlight the importance of access to finance without downside costs so that entrepreneurs are encouraged to take risk. Further, the data highlight institutional differences in risk attitudes that more generally inhibit risk‐taking and thereby limit the effectiveness of entrepreneurship. Moreover, the data highlight a central role for careful measurement of entrepreneurial activities and for inclusion of as many countries and years as possible in order to effectively analyze the impact of entrepreneurship.