1、 SmallBusEcon(2012)39:531537DOI10.1007/s11187-011-9328-5Entrepreneurialactivityandregionalcompetitiveness:anintroductiontothespecialissueDavidB.Audretsch InakiPena-LegazkueAccepted:1December2010/Publishedonline:2April2011SpringerScience+BusinessMedia,LLC.2011Abstract Animportantgoalofthisspecialissu
2、eisJELClassications R11O33D24togainabetterunderstandingofthelinkagebetweentheentrepreneurialactivityofaregionanditslevelofcompetitiveness. Comparative studies across coun-triesaboundintheliterature,butmuchstillremainsto be investigated on the role played by entrepre-neurshipintransforminglocaleconom
3、ies.Thesetofpapers includedin this special issue aims to ll thisconceptual and empirical gap. In general, besidesacknowledging the existence of a bi-directionalrelationship between entrepreneurship and regionalcompetitiveness, the papers shed some light on theendogenous process of wealth creation in
4、 localeconomies.1 IntroductionPolicymakersandtheacademiccommunityhaveforalongtimeshownanobviousinterestinthefactorsaffectingthewealthofregions.Entrepreneurshiphasbeen often referred to as an engine of change,innovation, and economic growth. Yet, our knowl-edge on the linkage between the entrepreneur
5、ialcapitalembeddedinalocaleconomyandthelevelofregional wealth is far from complete. Indeed, thestudy of the relationship between entrepreneurialactivity and economic growth in todays rapidlytransforming competitive landscape becomes a nec-essaryandchallengingtask.Keywords EntrepreneurshipRegionalcom
6、petitivenessThe challenge of this special issue is twofold.First, and from aconceptual standpoint,understand-ing the aforementioned linkage itself is a complextask, since intuitively a reverse causation seems toexist between economic development and entrepre-neurial capital. An economically advanced
7、 regionmay be better suited to nurture innovation-drivenhigh growth ventures, but, at the same time, a highboostandconcentrationoftheso-calledgazellermsinagiventerritoryisexpectedtoenhanceitslevelofcompetitiveness and prosperity. Secondly, and froman empirical perspective, the rm start-up activityan
8、dtheentrepreneurialcapitalofagivencountryareD.B.AudretschIndianaUniversity,Bloomington,IN,USAe-mail:daudretsindiana.eduD.B.AudretschKingSaudUniversity,Riyadh,SaudiArabiaD.B.AudretschWHUOttoBresheimSchoolofManagement,Vallendar,GermanyI.Pena-Legazkue (differencestendtovanishforlaterstagesoftheentrepre
9、neurialladder(Optimal)SpatialAggregationintheDeterminantsofIndustrialLocationArauzo,ManjonSub-nationalregionsofCataloniaTheusualpracticeofusingadministrativerecordsascovariatesfornewrmlocationmayprovidemisleadingresultsandpolicyimplicationsAn alternative way to capture the effect ofinnovationandentr
10、epreneurialcapabilityonregionalcompetitiveness is by looking at productivity levelsof a local economy (i.e., total factor productivitylevels)ratherthanatthecapacitytocreatenewjobs.Gonzalez, Pena and Vendrell examine the variationofregionalproductivitylevelsinSpain.Theauthorsshowapositivecorrelationb
11、etweenregionalproduc-tivity and a higher capability of a local economy toinnovateand create newrms.The ndingssuggestthat innovation per se is a necessary, but not asufcient economic condition to enhance regionalcomparative advantage. According to the authors,bothinnovationandentrepreneurialcapabilit
12、iesmayrevealregionaldistinctivecapabilitiesshapingamorecompetitivelocaleconomy.regions of the Netherlands, Koster, van Stel andFolkeringa hold that the effect of market entry oncompetition is not uniform across industry sectors.Morespecically,theirndingsconrmtheexistenceof a positive effect of entry
13、 on market competition(i.e.,marketmobility)inthemanufacturingindustrysector, but they nd no effect in the service sector.TheintensityoftheSchumpeteriancreativedestruc-tion process by which new entrants displace incum-bents varies across industry sectors. These resultsimply that the effect of entrepr
14、eneurial activity onregional competitiveness depends on the industrysectorspecializationofthelocaleconomy.Otherstudiesofthisspecialissuehavefollowedadifferent approach and have analyzed the oppositeeffect bytesting theinuenceoftheconditionofthelocaleconomyonthecharacteristicsofnewentrants.Thus,thepa
15、perbyAudretsch,Hulsbeck andLehmanConventional wisdom suggests that entry of newrms increases competition. In a study of about 40123536 D.B.Audretsch,I.Pena-Legazkueshowsthatinnovation-drivenyoungventuresseemtobe born, nurtured and concentrated in regions withdistinctive features. The authors nd that
16、 regionalcompetitivenessandlocaluniversityspilloversaffecttheinnovationbehaviorofentrepreneurialrms.Morespecically, using data from German regions, theauthorsconcludethattheinnovativebehaviorofstart-ups is shaped by both the existence of researchintensiveuniversitiesandlocation-specicadvantagessucha
17、stheaboveaveragelocalwealthendowment.The innovation behaviour of young start-ups isalso studied by Robson, Akuetteh, Westhead andWrightbutinaquitedifferenteconomiccontext.Thestudy conducted in Ghana is very insightful since itallowsustoverifytheextenttowhichndingsofanemergingregionareequivalenttotho
18、seobtainedinadevelopedeconomy.Theresultssuggestthattheroleofexperiencedentrepreneursseemstobeparticularlyrelevant in emerging economies. The authors arguethat, in order to increase the number and quality ofinnovation-drivennewbusinessstart-ups,andtherebyto ensure economic growth in regions like Ghan
19、a,policy makers need to design more selective andcustomizedpoliciestargetedtoexperiencedportfolioentrepreneurs.distancesandalternativespatialautocorrelationmea-sures). Findings from their study conducted inCatalonia warn that the use of administrative vari-ables may lead us to inaccurate interpretat
20、ions andmisleading policy recommendations for new rmcreationandregionalcompetitiveness.4 PolicyandresearchimplicationsSeveral policy implications are derived from thepapers of this special issue. First, policy makersshould understand that innovation alone does notsufceforimprovingregionalcompetitive
21、ness;entre-preneurship plays a crucial role as it often craftsinnovative ideas into economic value through newrmcreation(AudretschandKeilbach2004).Second(direct and indirect) local economic effects derivedfromanenrichedentrepreneurialcapitalwillnotariseintheshortrun.Rather,buildingandstrengtheningal
22、ocal entrepreneurial ecosystem may take severalyears; a long-term economic impact should beexpected as is suggested by Fritsch (2008). Third,theidiosyncraticnatureofalocaleconomymakesitdifcult to replicate and apply recipes that haveworkedwellinotherregions.Eachregionmustmoveon its own path by maxim
23、izing its strengths andminimizingitsweaknesses.Policymakersshouldnotonlypermanentlymonitor,supportandevaluateeachof the myriad of actors who constitute the entrepre-neurial capital embedded in a region (i.e., entrepre-neurs, business angles, venture capital, universities,innovationandbusinessincubat
24、ioncenters,etc.)butshould also facilitate the connection and successfulinteractionamongalltheselocalplayers.ThepaperbyvanderZwan,Verheul,andThurikinvestigate both the inuence of individual-levelvariables, with special emphasis on gender, andcontext-level variables on the ability of a rm toprogress t
25、hrough different development stages (i.e.,theso-calledentrepreneurialladder).Accordingtothe authors, regions benet in terms of competitive-nesswhenadiversegroupofpeopleisabletoengagein the entrepreneurial process. Using data from 32European countries, 3 Asian countries, and the US,theauthorsexaminet
26、hebackwardpositionofwomenindifferentstagesoftheentrepreneurialprocessandhold that countries show large variation in the easewith which ventures comeinto existence by womenand survive. Differences across genders tend todisappearatlaterstagesoftheentrepreneurialladder.Finally, Arauzo and Manjon raise
27、an interestingargument on measurement issues. Empirical studieshaveheavilyreliedonavailableadministrativeleveldata (i.e., counties, provinces, and municipalities).The authors cast serious doubts on this method andtestthevalidityofthesevariablesbycomparingthemtootherspatiallyvaryingexplanatoryvariabl
28、es(i.e.,variables estimated by using a wide range ofSome issues have been addressed in this specialissue, but many questions still remain unanswered;wesuggestjustafewforfutureresearch.Thepapersby Audretsch, Hulbeck and Lehman and by Gon-zalez, Pena and Vendrell demonstrate theprevailingcausal ambigu
29、ity in the relationship between entre-preneurial activity and regional competitiveness.Clearly,thevirtualcirclethatspurseconomicdevel-opment works better in some local contexts (i.e.,SiliconValley)thaninothers.Disentanglinghowthisvirtualcircleworksisacomplextask.Furthermore,itisdifculttodefendwhicho
30、fthetwo,entrepreneurialcapitalorlocalcompetitiveness,isthedeterminantofthe other. Nonetheless, we can raise interesting123Entrepreneurialactivityandregionalcompetitiveness 537questions: which are the local (market, institutional,social) barriers that impede or slow down the speedof this virtual circ
31、le? How can a region overcomesuchbarriers?UsingthemetaphorofvanderZwan,Verheul, and Thurik, which are the major obstaclesfaced by a region to climb through the entrepre-neurialladder?MaxPlanckInstituteofEconomics,andheldinSanSebastian,Spain,onJune1819th,2009.ReferencesAcs, Z. J., & Storey, D. J. (20
32、04). Introduction: Entrepre-neurship and economic development. Regional Studies,38(8),871877.Acs, Z. J., & Szerb, L. (2007). Entrepreneurship, economicgrowth and public policy. Small Business Economics,28(2),109122.Audretsch, D. B., & Keilbach, M. (2004). Entrepreneurshipcapital and economic perform
33、ance. Regional Studies,38(8),949959.Fritsch, M. (2008). How does new business formation affectregional development? Introduction to the special issue.SmallBusinessEconomics,30(1),114.Hughes,A.(2003).Knowledge transfer,entrepreneurship andeconomic growth: Some reections and implications forpolicyinth
34、eNetherlands.WorkingPaperNo.273.ESRCCentreforBusinessResearch,UniversityofCambridge.Reynolds, P., Storey, D. J., & Westhead, P. (1994). Cross-national comparisons of the variation in new rm for-mation rates: An editorial overview. Regional Studies,28(4),343346.A meaningful answer to these questions
35、calls formore quantitative analyses conducted in other localeconomies,representingbothadvancedandemergingeconomiesassuggestedbyRobson,Akuetteh,West-headandWright.Databasesshouldincludeinforma-tion for long periods of time in order to capture thelong-term effects of this virtual circle process.Arauzo
36、 and Manjon advised caution in using con-ventional methods to create variables describingdifferent features of local economies. To have abetterpicture,quantitativestudiesshouldbecomple-mentedwithdetailedcasestudiesontheevolutionofthevirtualcircleindistinctlocaleconomiccontexts.AcknowledgmentsUnivers
37、itiesInaki PenawantstothanktheEducation,and Research Department of the Basque van Dijk, J., & Pellenbarg, P. H. (2000). Spatial perspectivesonrm demography. Papers inRegional Science, 79(2),107110.GovernmentforthenancialsupportgrantedtotheWorkshopEntrepreneurial Activity and Regional CompetitivenessorganizedbytheBasqueInstituteofCompetitivenessandthe123
