Entrepreneurship: Origins and Returns
By H. Berglann, Espen R. Moen, Knut Røed, Jens Skogstrøm. Social Science Research Network, 2009
205 citations recorded by the source corpus.
We examine the origins and outcome of entrepreneurship on the basis of exceptionally comprehensive Norwegian matched worker-firm-owner data. In contrast to most existing studies, our notion of entrepreneurship not only comprises self-employment, but also employment in partly self-owned limited liability firms. Based on this extended entrepreneurship concept, we find that entrepreneurship tends to be profitable. It also raises income uncertainty, but the most successful quartile gains much more than the least successful quartile loses. Key determinants of the decision to become an entrepreneur are occupational qualifications, family resources, gender, and work environments. Individual unemployment encourages, while aggregate unemployment discourages entrepreneurship.
Subfields: Accounting, Economics and Econometrics, Management of Technology and Innovation
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/15b9103fae0a68280e6d3e2fe32f93b9e7b16ade
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Accounting
- Jing Chen
- Mário Lino Barata Raposo
- João J. M. Ferreira
- Alain Fayolle
- Tom Åstebro
- Cristina I. Fernandes
- Laura J. Kornish
- Karl T. Ulrich
In Economics and Econometrics
- Mário Lino Barata Raposo
- Jing Chen
- João J. M. Ferreira
- Alain Fayolle
- Tom Åstebro
- Cristina I. Fernandes
In Management of Technology and Innovation
- João J. M. Ferreira
- Mário Lino Barata Raposo
- Jing Chen
- Alain Fayolle
- Tom Åstebro
- Cristina I. Fernandes
- José Chamoso Sánchez
- E. Lyon
Citations in the corpus
- The entrepreneurial earnings puzzle: Mismeasurement or real? (2014, background): “However, in Norway, the estimated difference was positive, 16% (Berglann et al., 2011).”
- Effects of Schumpeterian and Kirznerian entrepreneurship on economic growth: panel data evidence (2017, background): “…have received increasing contemporary recognition on a global scale even if, due in large part to their transversality, heterogeneity and subjectivity (Davidsson 2009), they have certainly not become the subject of much academic consensus (Berglann et al. 2011; Martin, Picazo, and Navarro 2010).”