THE EVOLUTION OF UNDERSTANDING OF ENTREPRENEURSHIP DETERMINANTS IN MODERN ECONOMICS

Author
, Doctor of Sciences (Economics), Professor, Professor of Economics Department, Lviv, prospekt Svobody, 18
, Ph.D. in Economics, Associate Professor, Associate Professor of Department of Economics and Marketing, Ukraine, Lviv

In heading

 Economic theory;

Signed print

 26.05.2023

Issues number

 2023-№2 (53)

Page

 6-23

Type of articles

 Scientific article

Code UDK

 330.83:334.01

ISSN print

 2411-5584

Abstract

 Problem setting. The success of afterwar reconstruction in Ukraine will require a substantial decrease in government intrusion into the economy and robust private sector formation. Therefore, supporting entrepreneurial activities should become one of the critical priorities of economic policy. Hence the systemic analysis of different entrepreneurship facets is of great scientific and practical interest.
Recent research and publications analysis. The current interpretation of entrepreneurship in economics is based on a relatively harmonious combination of approaches proposed by F. Knight, J. Schumpeter, and I. Kirzner. Modern research trends include the study of formal and informal institutions’ influence on the entrepreneurial activities’ allocation, analysis of the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on entrepreneurship and small businesses, the study of entrepreneurship specifics under digital platform economy, and sustainable development transition.
Paper objective. The article aims to trace the evolution of views on the role of determinants, which caused individuals’ decisions to start entrepreneurial activities.
Paper main body. A deep and comprehensive study of entrepreneurship requires a thoughtful analysis of the history of economic theories and methods. For centuries prominent representatives of various economic schools focused on different facets of entrepreneurship and individual traits of entrepreneurs. Still, today, as it turns out to be quite often, there is no single general approach to defining the determinants of the individual’s choice in favor of entrepreneurial activities.
Scholars used to consider many of the most diverse factors to explain the phenomenon of entrepreneurship. First, the attention was focused on different individual motivations, specific personality traits of potential and incumbent entrepreneurs, and details of economic and institutional environments in which entrepreneurial activities were provided. In general, the choice in favor of becoming an entrepreneur is made considering the opportunities of earning financial rewards and successful realization of personal traits – the willingness to bear risks and act under uncertainty, the skills to organize production process and motivate others, the abilities to generate creative ideas and implement innovations, to find favorable opportunities to earn profits and exploit them.
During the last decades, the research in entrepreneurship determinants mostly centered on different kinds of occupation choice models. The two most important distinctions of these theories are the dominance of the expected utility maximizing paradigm and providing their simplifying assumptions in explicit form.
The decrease of the government’s powers in the national economy and the development of a solid entrepreneurial sector are two essential preconditions for postwar reconstruction in Ukraine to be successful. So, the consistent promotion of the entrepreneurial initiative and strong support for entrepreneurship and small businesses should become key priorities of Ukrainian authorities’ economic policies.
Conclusions of the research. The interaction of different factors, including plural aspects of motivations, personal traits, and external effects, can influence individuals’ decisions concerning occupational choice and prompt them to start entrepreneurial activities. Today the research in this sphere became avalanche-like but theoretical approaches proposed by prominent economists of the past remain the solid fundamentals of modern studies.
Short abstract for an article
Abstract. The interaction of different factors, including plural aspects of motivations, personal traits, and external effects, can influence individuals’ decisions concerning occupational choice and prompt them to start entrepreneurial activities. Today the research in this sphere became avalanche-like but theoretical approaches proposed by prominent economists of the past remain the solid fundamentals of modern studies.

Keywords

 entrepreneurship, entrepreneurs’ functions, burden of uncertainty, innovations, entrepreneurship determinants, entrepreneurial abilities.

Reviewer

External reviewer

Article in PDF

 6-23

Bibliography

 1. Ekelund R. B., Jr., & Hébert R. F. (1990). A history of economic theory and method (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill, Inc.
2. Blaug, M. (2001). Economic theory in retrospect. I. Dziub (Translator from English). Osnovy [in Ukrainian]. (Original work published 1962).
3. von Mises, L. (2008). Profit and loss. Ludwig von Mises Institute. Retrieved April 10, 2023, from https://cdn.mises.org/Profit%20and%20Loss_3.pdf (Original work published in 1951).
4. Weber, M. (1994). Protestantska etyka i dukh kapitalizmu [The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism]. O. Pohorilyi (Translator from German). Osnovy [in Ukrainian]. (Original work published in 1905).
5. Sombart, W. (2017). Economic life in the modern age. Routledge; Taylor & Francis Group.
6. Knight, F. H. (1921). Risk, uncertainty and profit. Houghton Mifflin Company. Retrieved April 15, 2023, from https://discoversocialsciences.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/03/knight-uncertainty-and-profit.pdf
7. Knight, F. H. (1942). Profit and entrepreneurial functions. The Journal of Economic History, 2, Suppl., 126–132. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2112940
8. Schumpeter, J. A. (2011). The theory of economic development. V. Starka (Translator from English). Vydavnychyi dim «Kyievo-Mohylianska akademiia» [in Ukrainian]. (Original work published in 1934).
9. Schumpeter, J. A. (1995). Capitalism, socialism and democracy. V. Ruzhytskyi, P. Tarashchuk (Translators from English). Osnovy [in Ukrainian]. (Original work published 1942).
10. Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial discovery and the competitive market process: An Austrian approach. Journal of Economic Literature, XXXV, 60–85.
11. Audretsch, D. B., Belitski, M., Chowdhury, F., & Desai, S. (2022). Necessity or opportunity? Government size, tax policy, corruption, and implications for entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 58, 2025–2042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187‑021‑00497‑2
12. Belitski, M., Guenther, C., Kritikos, A. S., & Thurik, R. (2022). Economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on entrepreneurship and small businesses. Small Business Economics, 58, 593–609. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187‑021‑00544‑y
13. Acs, Z. J., Song, A. K., Szerb, L., Audretsch, D. B., & Komlosi, E. (2021). The evolution of the global digital platform economy. Small Business Economics, 57(2), 1–31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187‑021‑00561‑x
14. Volkmann, C., Fichter, K., Klofsten, M., & Audretsch, D. B. (2021). Sustainable entrepreneurial ecosystems: An emerging field of research. Small Business Economics, 56, 1047–1055. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187‑019‑00253‑7
15. Iversen, J., Jørgensen, R., & Malchow-Møller, N. (2008). Defining and Measuring Entrepreneurship. Foundations and Trends® in Entrepreneurship, 4(1), 1–63. https://doi.org/10.1561/0300000020
16. Karayiannis, A. D. (2009). The Marshallian entrepreneur. History of Economic Ideas, 17(3), 75–102. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23723450
17. Ebner, A. (2004). Hayek on entrepreneurship: Competition, market process and cultural evolution. Retrieved April 16, 2023, from https://www.fb03.uni-frankfurt.de/75199393/Ebner_2004_BackhausHg_HayekEntrepreneurshipSubmitted.pdf
18. Vatamanyuk, O. Z., & Vatamanyuk, M. M. (2017). Evoliutsiia ta suchasne rozuminnia katehorii «pidpryiemets» v ekonomichnii nautsi [The evolution and modern understanding of entrepreneur in economics]. Naukovyi visnyk NLTU Ukrainy. Seriia ekonomichna – Scientific Bulletin of UNFU. Economic Series, 27(2), 42–47. https://doi.org/10.15421/40270208 [in Ukrainian].
19. Varnalii, Z. S. (2008). Male pidpryiemnytstvo: osnovy teorii i praktyky [Small entrepreneurship: Basics of theory and practice] (4th ed.). Tovarystvo «Znannia», KOO [in Ukrainian].
20. Ricketts, M. (2002). The economics of business enterprise. Edward Elgar.
21. Gifford, S. (1998). The entrepreneur in economic theory. In The Allocation of Limited Entrepreneurial Attention. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978‑1‑4615‑5605‑3_1
22. Dosi, G. (1988). The Nature of the Innovation Process. In G. Dosi, C. Freeman, R. Nelson, G. Silverberg, L. Soete (Eds.), Technical Change and Economic Theory (pp. 221–238). Pinter.
23. Casson, M. (2003). The entrepreneur: An economic theory. Edward Elgar.
24. Pinchot III, G. (1985). Intrapreneuring: Why you don’t have to leave the corporation to become an entrepreneur. Harper & Row.
25. Parker, S. C. (2009). The economics of entrepreneurship. Cambridge University Press.
26. de Wit, G. (2012). Determinants of self-employment. Springer.
27. Meredith, G. G., Nelson, R. E., & Neck, P. A. (1982). The practice of entrepreneurship. International Labor Organization.
28. Dixit, A. (1989). Entry and exit decisions under uncertainty. Journal of Political Economy, 97(3), 620–638. https://doi.org/10.1086/261619
29. Dixit, A., & Rob, R. (1994). Switching costs and sectoral adjustments in general equilibrium with uninsured risk. Journal of Economic Theory, 62(1), 48–69. https://doi.org/10.1006/jeth.1994.1003
30. Lucas, R. E., Jr. (1978). On the size distribution of business firms. The Bell Journal of Economics, 9(2), 508–523. https://doi.org/10.2307/3003596

Code DOI

 https://doi.org/10.31359/2411‑5584‑2023‑53‑2-6

26.05.2023