Evaluation of the impact of self-employment factors on self-employment duration in the country with transition economy: a Lithuanian case.
Startiene, Grazina ; Remeikiene, Rita
Introduction
According to Ciemleja and Lace (2011), "Small and medium
enterprises are socially and economically important for their national
economies because they make about 99 per cent of all enterprises
functioning in the European Union. An enterprise, as the base of any
economic system, has significant effect on sustainable development of
the country or region." (p. 509). With reference to Petuskiene and
Glinskiene (2011),"entrepreneurship, as the act of organizational
renewal and innovation creation, is the base engine of economy and
development" (p. 74). Although self-employment, as the simplest
form of entrepreneurship, earned more scientific attention back to
1970-1980, when the number of the self-employed was significantly
increasing (Startiene et al. 2010), the impact of self-employment
factors on self-employment process (start-up and duration) has still
been discussed. The research revealed that in both transition economies
and industrial countries, scientists mostly analyse the impact of
self-employment start-up factors, i.e. the factors that determine
personal decision to act independently in the labour market (Earle,
Sakova 2000; Andersson, Hammarstedt 2010; Blanchflower 2008; Leoni, Falk
2010; Krasniqi 2009; Golpe, Stel 2007; Glocker, Steiner 2007; Kim 2007;
Oganisjana, Koke 2012; Snieska, Venckuviene 2011; Alvarez-Herranz et al.
2011; Smaliukiene et al. 2012; Moreno et al. 2010; Vazquez-Burgete et
al. 2012 and others), whereas the factors of self-employment duration as
well as their impact on self-employment level are hardly covered in the
scientific literature.
The results of the research of the impact of self-employment
factors revealed that the impact of self-employment factors can be
bidirectional, i.e. self-employment factors can influence a
self-employed person both positively and negatively. For instance, in
the group of the factors of institutional environment of
self-employment, particular programmes are used to promote (self)
employment (Berzinskiene, Juozaitiene 2011). However, these programmes
do not ensure the success of business sustainability. Evaluation of the
impact of promotional programmes on self-employment duration could help
to project targeted measures in order to ensure business sustainability.
It can be assumed that evaluation of the impact of self-employment
factors on a self-employed person can help the particular institutions
of the country to apply targeted business regulation measures that would
promote the increase of self-employment and help to avoid negative
consequences on the economy of the country (alternative use of the
financial support initially projected for business start-up).
The main problem we meet in the scientific literature is how do
self-employment factors influence self-employment duration in transition
economies? Transition economies were chosen for the research due to the
following reasons: firstly, the conditions of business startup and
development are more difficult in transition economies than in
industrial countries (European Bank for Reconstruction and Development
2010), and secondly, according to Eurostat data, the number of the
self-employed is bigger in transition economies (Hungary, Poland,
Lithuania, etc.) in comparison with industrial countries (for example,
France or Germany).
The authors are aiming to determine the impact of bidirectional
factors of self-employment on self-employment duration in the country
with transition economy in this paper. To reach the aim expert
evaluation, systematical, logical and comparative analysis of the
scientific literature and statistical data, correlation analysis are
applied in this article.
With reference to the results of the research, in the first part of
the article, the bidirectional factors of self-employment duration in
each group of self-employment factors have been highlighted and the
hypotheses have been formulated. In order to determine the impact of
self-employment factors, the second part of the article is designed for
the research of the impact of bidirectional factors of self-employment
on self-employment duration applying particular methods, i.e.
correlation analysis has been used to research the quantitative effects
of self-employment factors, and the method of expert evaluation has been
used to research the qualitative effects.
1. Review of literature
Previous studies revealed that self-employment factors can be
classified into particular groups: demographical factors (Startiene,
Remeikiene 2009); cultural factors and factors of economic environment
(Remeikiene, Startiene 2008); factors of institutional environment
(Remeikiene, Startiene 2011); social-psychological factors (Remeikiene
et al. 2011). The scientific literature states that apart from the
impact of the factors mentioned above, self-employment duration is also
influenced by geographical and technological factors. However, the focus
of this article is the factors of economic and institutional environment
as well as demographical factors having the biggest influence on
self-employment duration. On the other hand, some authors (Tervo,
Haapanen 2009; Wennekers et al. 2002; Goey 2004; Acs 2008), who analysed
geographical and technological factors of self-employment, did not find
any bidirectional effects of these factors on self-employment process.
The scientific literature includes many contradictions concerning
the impact of self-employment factors on self-employment duration. The
results of some studies showed that the same factor in the particular
group of self-employment factors can influence a self-employed person
positively, but the results of other studies propose converse
conclusions. The self-employment factors having bidirectional effect on
self-employment duration have been systematised and presented in Table
1.
Summarizing, it can be concluded that scientists propose
contradictory opinions concerning the impact of the analysed factors on
self-employment duration. They disagree on which age interval is the
most favourable for self-employment development. Higher education can
both a bit increase the opportunities to find a salaried work and help
to handle business risk, this way sustaining self-employment. The
results of previous experience of self-employment can positively or
negatively influence self-employment duration. Marital status,
especially if a family is growing up children, can become a strive to
improve family life standards, but on the other hand, childcare can
leave too little time for self-employment development. Immigrants often
lack of the experience to develop self-employment in a host country, but
on the other hand, the barriers of self-employment development can be
overcome learning the local language and knowing the local culture,
customs, etc. better. High unemployment rate can reduce self-employment
sustainability due to consumption decrease. However, limited
opportunities to find a wage employment can become a perfect alternative
to make livelihood. Growth of GDP shows the rise of the economics in the
country and determines increased consumption which positively influences
self-employment duration. However, rising economics opens more
opportunities to find a wage-job as a paid employee (Golpe, Stel 2007).
In many cases, low income tax tariffs increase the profits earned by a
self-employed person while high tax tariffs reduce it. On the other
hand, a self-employed person can be inclined to hide high income taxes.
Promotion programmes can only partly increase the number of the
self-employed since they do not guarantee self-employment
sustainability. On the other hand, promotion programmes help a person to
stay in the market or encourage him to look for new opportunities to
export the goods/services to new markets. Strict regulation of labour
market can partly contribute to the increase of the number of the
self-employed, but it can also reduce the motivation to become an
employer hiring other people. In contrast to the "Big Five"
structure, where extraversion, openness and neuroticism are considered
to distinguish entrepreneur's personality from other personalities,
the empirical research has revealed that the impact of the psychological
factors on self-employment is different because openness, neuroticism
and extraversion suppress self-employment.
After the establishment of bidirectional factors of self-employment
duration, and evaluation of the specificity of transition economies, the
following hypotheses have been framed: 1st hypothesis: Self-employment
duration is positively influenced by successful previous experience of
self-employment, middle aged people, education and having of older
children, and negatively influenced by younger people and immigrants
(national minorities, people of other race).
2nd hypothesis: Growth of unemployment rate during the period of
economic declineshortens self-employment duration.
3rd hypothesis: Growth of GDP in transition economies causes the
level of self-employment to decrease and self-employment duration to
shorten.
4th hypothesis: Transition economies show the negative link between
income taxes and the level of self-employment, i.e. low income taxes
prolong self-employment duration while high taxes shorten it.
5th hypothesis: Strict regulation of labour market is one of the
main barriers to develop self-employment in transition economies.
6th hypothesis: In transition economies, self-employment duration
is positively influenced by the increased supply of business promotion
measures (financial and non-financial), but lack of information remains
the main obstacle to choose the most suitable promotion measure from all
possible alternatives and absorb the support.
7th hypothesis: The self-employed people show low level of
neuroticism as well as high level of extraversion and openness.
2. The results of the empirical research
For verification of hypotheses 1, 2 and 4-7, the qualitative method
of the research was chosen--the research was carried out using the
method of expert evaluation by the questionnaire prepared in advance.
For verification of hypothesis 3, the quantitative method of the
research--correlation analysis--was chosen. The empirical research was
based not on the mass of the questionnaire survey, but on the competence
of the experts, years of their experience in self-employment and the
knowledge of self-employment environmental conditions and problems.
Therefore, 30 people were included in the group of the experts. The
research was carried on in January-February, 2011. The calculated value
of Cronbach's alpha (2) coefficient is equal to 0.706, which
proposes that the statements of the questionnaire reflect the target
value with sufficient accuracy.
Summarizing the answers of the experts, it can be concluded that:
1) 1st hypothesis was only partly confirmed. More than a half of
all the experts agree that self-employment duration is positively
influenced by successful previous self-employment experience (as it was
stated by 93.4 per cent of the experts), middle aged people (63.4 per
cent), education (56.7 per cent) and having older children (70 per
cent). The results of the research revealed that younger people is not
considered to be an obstacle to develop self-employment since 63.4 per
cent of the respondents disagree with this proposition. Evaluating the
impact of immigration on self-employment, it was established that 26.7
per cent of the respondents disagree, 30 per cent have no opinion, and
43.3 per cent agree with the proposition that immigrants, national
minorities and people of other race stop self-employment activities more
often than the local self-employed due to the lack of language skills,
ignorance of traditions, business or legal framework. Therefore,
immigration can be considered the factor reducing self-employment
duration.
2) 2nd hypothesis was only partly confirmed: growth of unemployment
rate during the period of economic decline shortens self-employment
duration. 43.3 per cent of the experts agree that unemployment rate
shortens self-employment duration, 33.3 per cent have no opinion while
23.4 per cent of the experts disagree with this proposition.
3) 4th hypothesis was confirmed because 93.7 per cent of the
experts concurred: the negative link between income tax and the level of
self-employment is pre-dominant in transition economies, i.e. low taxes
prolong self-employment duration while high taxes shorten it.
4) 5th hypothesis was confirmed: strict regulation of labour market
is one of the main obstacles to develop self-employment in transition
economies. 90 per cent of the experts noted that strict labour market
regulation in Lithuania is one of the main barriers for the
self-employed to become employers.
5) 6th hypothesis was confirmed: self-employment duration in
transition economies is positively influenced by the increased supply of
business promotion measures (financial and non-financial), but the lack
of information remains the main obstacle to choose the most suitable
promotion measure from all possible alternatives and absorb the support.
The positive effects of financial business promotion measures were
stressed by 96.7 per cent of the experts, and 86.6 per cent agreed that
non-financial business promotion measures positively influence
self-employment duration. 76.6 per cent of the respondents agreed that
the lack of information can determine inability of a self-employed
person to choose the business promotion measure, most suitable for
his/her activity.
6) According to the experts, a self-employed person must show low
level of neuroticism (as it was stated by 96.6 per cent of the experts),
high level of extraversion (90 per cent of the experts) and openness
(93.3 per cent). This confirms 7th hypothesis.
Distribution of the experts' answers concerning the impact of
the factors pointed in hypotheses 1, 2 and 4-7 on self-employment
duration is presented in Figures 1-2.
The results of correlation analysis enabled confirmation of the 3rd
hypothesis proposing that the growth of GDP in transition economies
causes the level of self-employment to decrease and self-employment
duration to shorten (see Fig. 3). Pearson correlation coefficient showed
the negative moderate ([r.sub.GDP] = -0.69) link, meaning that higher
GDP level in the country determines smaller number of the self-employed
and vice versa (the "push" (3) effect).
[FIGURE 3 OMITTED]
In order to establish the impact of growing GDP on self-employment
duration, cross correlation coefficient was calculated. Considering the
four years' time shift (4), cross correlation coefficient revealed
statistically important negative links between GDP and the number of the
self-employed ([r.sub.k] = -0.696, when the time shift is 0 years;
[r.sub.k] = -0.844, when the time shift is 1 year, and [r.sub.k] =
-0.601, when the time shift is 2 years), which proposes that the
increase of GDP shortens self-employment duration. The results should be
interpreted as follows: year zero or current year means that during the
period of 1998-2009, the values of x were compared with the
corresponding values of y, i.e. how variations of GDP level could
influence the level of self-employment in the current year. means time
shift one year ago, when the values of x during the period of 1998-2008
were compared with the values of y during the period 1999-2009, i.e. how
variations of GDP level previous year could influence the level of
self-employment the next year. "+2" means time shift two years
ago, when the values of x during the period 1998-2007 were compared with
the values of y during the period 2000-2009, i.e. how variation of GDP
level two years before could influence the level of self-employment the
later years and so forth. In the researched case, the increasing level
of GDP during the period of 1998-2009 could influence the decline of the
level of self-employment during the same period; during the periods of
1998-2008 and 1998-2007, the increasing GDP could determine the decline
of the level of self-employment during the periods of 1999-2009 and
2000-2009.
With reference to the empirical research, it can be stated that
self-employment duration in Lithuania is negatively influenced by high
income tax and strict regulation of the labour market. Considering the
established negative impact of these factors on self-employment
duration, the government of the country could improve the applied
self-employment promotion measures. For instance, after the Government
of the Republic of Lithuania abolished the privileges applied for the
self-employed in 2011, since 2012, the prices of the business licence
have returned to the level of 2010, i.e. people wishing to perform any
activity under the business licence, have to pay for it 10 times more.
The authors of this article are of the opinion that such sudden rise of
prices can negatively influence self-employment duration. What is more,
self-employment development is restricted by inflexible regulation of
the labour market. With reference to the data provided by the Lithuanian
Free Market Institute (2012), Lithuania takes the 127th place among 183
states by the flexibility of labour relations, and is the sixth from the
end of the list in the EU. At present, the employers are discouraged to
hire other people due to inflexible working hours (8 hours per day),
high redundancy pays, long terms of the notice about the termination of
the employment contract, high labour taxes (31 per cent) and other
barriers.
Financial business promotion measures, low level of neuroticism and
successful previous experience of self-employment were appointed by the
experts as the factors having the biggest positive impact on
self-employment duration.
Motivating a self-employed person to create work places for other
people, the bound of the turnover to start paying the value-added tax
could be increased (5). Other recommendable financial self-employment
promotion measure is tax burden (excise, land and other taxes)
reduction.
In order to prevent the feeling of neuroticism (ensure good
emotional state and increase the feeling of safety) so that
self-employment activity would be performed longer, the differences of
social guarantees should be reduced because under the present conditions
of business environment, the self-employed people have fewer social
guarantees in comparison with the employees. At present, the
self-employed in Lithuaniaare covered only by the mandatory health
insurance and pension insurance (only for the basic pension). The people
insured only for the basic pension are not eligible for the sickness
benefit, maternity (paternity) allowance or unemployment benefit because
they are not covered by these kinds of insurance. What is more, they
earn low pension. The self-employed people can insure themselves
voluntarily by the state social insurance for the supplementary pension
as well as sickness and maternity (paternity) benefits while the
employees have all social guarantees for pensions and are eligible for
sickness, maternity (paternity), unemployment, accidents at work and
occupational disease benefits. By the current procedures, the owners of
private companies must pay for the company's liabilities from their
personal assets. For instance, the owner of a private company may lose
his housing to paybusiness debts in case the other enterprise or
authority fails to pay his company, and the company is short of cash.
Meantime, the government pays exclusive attention to the
unemployed, but does not consider the people who were previously the
self-employed. In our opinion, investing in a person with business
experience and the knowledge of business subtleties, the country may
save and at the same time increase the level of self-employment. The
people who were previously self-employed could be encouraged to start
self-employment again, applying financial promotion measures (subsidies,
tax privileges).
Conclusions
Summarizing, the following conclusions can be made:
1) The established bidirectional--having positive and negative
impact--factors of self-employment duration in each group of
self-employment factors enable to focus on the selection of the targeted
self-employment regulation measures.
2) Using the method of expert evaluation and the statistical
methods, the impact of bidirectional factors of self-employment on
self-employment duration in the country with transition economy
(Lithuania) has been established:
--in the group of the factors of institutional environment,
financial and non-financial business promotion measures were indicated
by the experts as the factors having positive impact on self-employment
duration; self-employment duration is negatively influenced by strictly
regulated labour market;
--in the group of the factors of economic environment,
self-employment duration is positivelyinfluenced by decreasing GDP while
tax tariffs (high income tax) and unemployment rate (during the period
of economic decline) have the negative impact on self-employment
duration;
--in the group of psychological factors, self-employment duration
is positively influenced by extroversion, neuroticism and openness;
--in the group of demographical factors, self-employment duration
is positively influenced by education, previous experience of
self-employment, younger people and marital status while inability of
the immigrants, national minorities and the people of other race to
respond quickly to fast-changing business conditions/legal environment
has the negative impact on self-employment duration.
doi: 10.3846/20294913.2012.763073
References
Acs, Z. J. 2008. Foundations of high impact entrepreneurship,
Foundations and Trends Entrepreneurship 4(6): 535-620.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1561/0300000025
Ahn, T. 2009. Racial differences in self-employment exists, Small
Business Economics 1-18.
Alvarez-Herranz, A.; Valencia-De-Lara, P.; Pilar Martinez-Ruiz, M.
2011. How entrepreneurial characteristics influence company creation: a
cross-national study of 22 countriestested with panel data methodology,
Journal of Business Economics and Management 12(3): 529-545.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/16111699.2011.599409
Andersson, L.; Hammarstedt, M. 2010. Intergenerational
transmissions in immigrant self-employment: evidence from three
generations, Small Business Economics 34: 261-276.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9117-y
Bergmann, H.; Sternberg, R. 2007. The changing face of
entrepreneurship in Germany, Small Business Economics 28: 205-221.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-006-9016-z
Berzinskiene, D.; Juozaitiene, L. 2011. Impact of labour market
measures on unemployment, Inzinerine Ekonomika--Engineering Economics
22(2): 186-195.
Beugelsdijk, S.; Noordehaven, N. 2005. Personality characteristics
of self-employed: an empirical study, Small Business Economics 24:
159-167. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-003-3806-3
Blanchflower, D. G. 2008. Minority self-employment in the United
States and impact of affirmative action programs, Annals of Finance
5(3): 361-396. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10436-008-0099-1
Briscoe, G.; Dainty, A.; Millett, S. 2000. The impact of tax system
on self-employment in British construction industry, International
Journal of Manpower 21: 596-613.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/01437720010379501
Bruce, D. 2000. Effects of the United States tax system on
transition into self-employment, Labour Economics 7: 545-574.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0927-5371(00)00013-0
Bruce, D.; Mohsin, M. 2006. Tax policy and entrepreneurship: new
time series evidence, Small Business Economics 26: 409-425.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-005-5602-8
Borjas, G. 1986. The self-employment experience of immigrants,
Journal of Human Resources 21: 485-505. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/145764
Carrasco, R.; Ejrnses, M. 2003. Self-employment in Denmark and
Spain: institutions, economic conditions and gender differences. CAM,
1-22 [online]. [Cited 12 November 2011]. Available from Internet:
www.econ.ku.dk/CAM/Files/workingpapers/2003/2003-06.pdf
Ciavarella, M. A.; Buchholtz, A. K.; Riordan, Ch. M.; Gatewood, R.
D.; Stokes, G. S. 2004.The Big Five and venture survival: is there a
linkage?, Journal of Business Venturing 19: 465-483.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2003.03.001
Ciemleja, G.; Lace, N. 2011. The model of sustainable performance
of small and medium-sized enterprise, Inzinerine Ekonomika--Engineering
Economics 22(2): 501-509.
Clark, K.; Drinkwater, C. 2010. Patterns of ethnic self-employment
in time and space: evidence from British Census microdata, Small
Business Economics 34(3): 323-338.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9122-1
Congregado, E.; Golpe, A. A.; Carmona, M. 2010. It is a good policy
to promote self-employment for job creation? Evidence from Spain,
Journal of Policy Modelling 32(6): 828-842.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpolmod.2010.09.001
Cowling, M.; Taylor, M. 2001. Entrepreneurial women and men: two
different species?, Small Business Economics 16: 167-175.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1011195516912
Cullen, J. B.; Gordon, R. H. 2002. Taxes and entrepreneurial
activity: theory and evidence for the U.S. NBER Working Paper. 9015. p.
58.
Dawson, C.; Henley, A.; Latreille, P. 2009. Why do individuals
choose self-employment? Discussion Paper, 3974, 42 [online]. [Cited 12
September 2012]. Available from internet:
http:www.ftp.iza.org/dp3974.pdf.
Djankov, S. 2009.The regulation of entry, The World Bank Research
Observer 24(2): 183-203. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkp005
Demirguc-Kunt, A.; Klapper, L. F.; Panos, G. A. 2007. The origins
of self-employment [online]. [Cited 12 March 2012]. Available from
internet: http:www.siteresources.worldbank.org/INTFR/Resources/
BosniaFeb07Klapperetal.pdf
Earle, J. S.; Sakova, Z. 2000. Business start-ups or disguised
unemployment? Evidence on the character of self-employment from
transition economies, Labour Economics 7(5): 575-601.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0927-5371(00)00014-2
European Bank for Reconstruction and Development. 2010. Transition
report: recovery and reform [online]. [Cited 09 January 2012]. Available
from internet: http:www.ebrd.com/pages/research/publications/flagships/transition.shtml
Evans, D. S.; Leighton, L. S. 1989. The determinants of changes in
U.S. self-employment, 1968-1987, Small Business Economics 1: 111-119.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/BF00398629
Falter, A. M. 2001. Self-employment entry and duration on
Switzerland [online]. [Cited 06 February 2011] Available from internet:
www.unige.ch /ses/lea/Instituts/oue/Publications/falter-these-paper2.pdf
Fairlie, R. W.; Meyer, B. D. 2000. Trends in self-employment among
white and black men during the twentieth century, The Journal of Human
Resources 35(4): 643-669. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/146366
Galt, V.; Moenning, C. 1996. An analysis of self-employment using
UK census of population, International Journal of Entrepreneurial
Behavior and Research 2(3): 82-88.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/EUM0000000004290
Gentry, W. M.; Hubbard, R. G. 2000. Tax policy and entrepeneurial
entry, American Economic Review 90: 283-287.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1257/aer.90.2.283
Georgellis, Y.; Sessions, J. G.; Tsitsianis, N. 2005.
Self-employment dynamics: a review of the literature, Economics 10(2):
51-84.
Georgellis, Y.; Sessions, J. G.; Tsitsianis, N. 2007. Pecuniary and
non-pecuniary aspects of self-employment survival, The Quarterly Review
of Economics and Finance 47(1): 94-112.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2006.03.002
Glocker, D.; Steiner, V. 2007. Self-employment: a way to end
unemployment? Empirical evidence from German pseudo-panel data.
Discussion Paper Series IZA DP, no. 2561 [online]. [Cited 03 January
2012]. Available from internet: http: //ftp.iza.org/dp2561.pdf
Goey, F. 2004. Economic structure and self-employment during the
twentieth century, in Paper 8th EBHA conference, 16-18 September,
Barselona, Spain, 2004, 26 p.
Golpe, A.; Stel, A. 2007. Self-employment and unemployment in
spanish regions in the period 1979-2001, Jena Economic Research Papers
2007-021: 1-13.
Grubb, D.; Wells, W. 1993. Employment regulation and patterns of
work in EC countries, OECD Economic Studies 21: 7-56.
Henley, A. 2005. Job creation by the self-employed: the roles of
the entrepreneurial and financial capital, Small Business Economics 25:
175-196. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-004-6480-1
Holtz-Eakin, D.; Joulfain, D.; Rosen, H. S. 1994. Sticking it out:
entrepreneurial survival and liquidity constraints, Journal of Political
Economy 102: 53-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/261921
Hundley, G. 2006. Family background and the propensity for
self-employment, Industrial Relations: A Journal of Economy and Society
45(3): 377-392.
Joona, P. A.; Wadensjo, E. A. 2008. Gender perspective on
self-employment entry and performance as self-employed. Discussion Paper
Series, no. 3581, 33 p.
Johansson, E. 2000. Determinants of self-employment
duration--evidence from Finnish micro-data, Essays on Economics and
Business Administration 85: 1-30.
Kangasharju, A.; Pekkala, S. 2002. The role of education in
self-employment success in Finland, Growth and Changes 33(2): 216-237.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/0017-4815.00188
Kim, G. 2007. The analysis of self-employment levels over the
life-cycle, The Quarterly Review of Economics and Finance 47(3):
397-410. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.qref.2006.06.004
Koellinger, P. D.; Thurik, A. R. 2009. Entrepreneurship in the
business cycle. Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper, TI09-032/3
[online]. [Cited 02 May 2011]. Available from internet: http:
www.tinbergen.nl/discussionpapers/09032.pdf
Krasniqi, B. A. 2009. Personal, household and business
environmental determinants of entrepreneurship, Journal of Small
Business and Enterprise Development 16(1): 146-166.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1108/14626000910932935
Knuth, M. 2006. Self-employment and the labour market in Germany
[online]. [Cited 20 December 2011]. Available from internet:
http:www.resqresearch.org/uplo aded_files/publications/knuth10.pdf.
Leoni, T.; Falk, M. 2010. Gender and field of study as determinants
of self-employment, Small Business Economics 34: 167-185.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-008-9114-1
Moreno, J. J.; Castillo, L. L.; Masere, E. Z. 2010. Firm size and
entrepreneurial characteristics: evidence from the SME sector in
Argentina, Journal of Business Economics and Management 11(2): 259-282.
http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/jbem.2010.13
Muehlberger, U. 2007. Dependent self-employment. Palgrave
Macmillan. http://dx.doi.org/10.1057/9780230288782
Noorderhaven, N. 2004. The role of dissatisfaction and per capita
income in explaining self-employment across 15 European countries,
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice 28(5): 447-466.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2004.00057.x
Oganisjana, K.; Koke, T. 2012. Does competence-oriented higher
education lead to students' competitiveness?, Inzinerine
Ekonomika--Engineering Economics 23(1): 77-82.
Parker, S. C. 2004. The economics of self-employment and
entrepreneurship. Cambridge University Press.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511493430
Parker, S. C.; Robson, M. T. 2004. Explaining international
variation in entrepreneurship: evidence from a panel of OECD countries
[online]. [Cited 01 October 2011]. Available from internet:
http:www.dur.ac.uk/resources/dbs/businessschool/research%20paper%20004.pdf.
Petuskiene, E.; Glinskiene, R. 2011. Entrepreneurship as the basic
element for the successful employment of benchmarking and business
innovations, Inzinerine Ekonomika--Engineering Economics 22(1): 69-77.
Plougmann, P. 1998. Self-employment in Denmark--trends and policy.
Danish Technological Institute & Centre for Industrial Analysis. 33
p.
Praag, Van M. C. 2003. Business survival and success of young small
business owners, Small Business Economics 21(1): 1-17.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1024453200297
Ritsila, J.; Tervo, H. 2002. Effects of unemployment on new firm
formation: micro-level panel data evidence from Finland, Small Business
Economics 19: 31-40. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1015734424259
Remeikiene, R.; Startiene, G. 2008. Relationship between
entrepreneurship and unemployment, in Proceedings, Economics and
Management--2008,13-osios tarptautines mokslines konferencijos pranesimu
mediiaga, Kaunas, 643-651 (in Lithuanian).
Remeikiene, R.; Startiene, G. 2011. The institutional environment
factors of self-employment in transition economies: the case of
Lithuania, in Changes in social and business environment. Proceedings of
the 4th International Conference, Panevezys, 186-194.
Remeikiene, R.; Startiene, G.; Vasauskaite, J. 2011. The influence
of psychological-sociological factors on self-employment, Economics
& Management, 287-294.
Schuetze, H. J. 2000. Taxes, economic conditions and recent trends
in male self-employment: a Canada-US comparison, Labour Econ 7(5):
507-544. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0927-5371(00)00012-9
Singh, G.; DeNoble, A. 2003. View on self-employment and
personality: an exploratory study, Journal of Development
Entrepreneurship 8(3): 265-281.
Smaliukiene, R.; Bekesiene, S.; Dudzeviciute, G. 2012. Counselling
for self-employment: the application of decision support system,
Business: Theory and Practice 13(1): 18-26.
Snieska, V.; Venckuviene, V. 2011. Hybrid venture capital funds in
lithuania: motives, factors and present state of development, Inzinerine
Ekonomika--Engineering Economics 22(2): 157-164.
Spencer, J. W.; Gomez, C. 2004. The relationship among national
institutional structures, economic factors and domestic entrepreneurial
activity: a multi-country study, Journal of Business Research 57:
1098-1107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0148-2963(03)00040-7
Startiene, G.; Remeikiene, R. 2009. The influence of demographical
factors on the interaction between entrepreneurship and unemployment,
Inzinerine Ekonomika--Engineering Economics (4): 60-70.
Startiene, G.; Remeikiene, R.; Dumciuviene, D. 2010. Concept of
self-employment, Economics and Management 15: 262-274.
Stel, A.; Carree, M.; Thurik, R. 2005. The effect of
entrepreneurial activity on national economic growth, Small Business
Economics 24(3): 311-321. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11187-005-1996-6
Stel, van A.; Thurik, R.; Wennekers, S.; Noorderhaven, N. 2003.
Self-Employment across 15 European Countries: The role of
dissatisfaction [online]. [Cited 16 September 2011]. Available from
internet: http:www.entrepreneurship-sme.eu/pdf-ez/N200223.pdf
Taylor, M. P. 1999. Survival of the fittest?, An analysis of
self-employment in Britain, The Economic Journal 109(454): 140-155.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1468-0297.00422
Tervo, H.; Haapanen, M. 2009. Self-employment duration in urban and
rural location, Applied Economics 41(19): 2449-2461.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00036840802360278
Thomas, M. K. 2009. The impact of educational histories on the
decision to become self-employed: a study of young, aspiring, minority
business owners, Small Business Economics 1-12.
Thurik, A. R.; Carree, M. A.; van Stel, A.; Audretsch, D. B. 2008.
Does self-employment reduce unemployment?, Journal of Business Venturing
23(6): 673-686. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.01.007
Vazquez-Burgete, J. L.; Lanero, A.; Raisiene, A. G.; Garcia, M. P.
2012. Entrepreneurship education in humanities and social sciences: are
students qualified to start a business?, Business: Theory and Practice
13(1): 27-35. http://dx.doi.org/10.3846/btp.2012.03
Verheul, I.; Stel, A.; Thurik, R. 2006. Explaining female and male
entrepreneurship at the country level, Entrepreneurship and Regional
Development 155-163.
Verheul, I.; Wennekers, S.; Audretsch, D.; Thurik, R. 2001. An
eclectic theory of entrepreneurship: policies, institutions and culture,
Economic of Science, Technology and Innovation 27: 11-81.
Wagner, J.; Sternberg, R. 2004. Start-up activities, individual
characteristics and the regional milieu: lessons for entrepreneurship
support policies from German micro data, The Annals of Regional Science
38: 219-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00168-004-0193-x
Williams, D. R. 2004. Youth self-employment: it nature and
consequences, Small Business Economics 23: 323-336.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:SBEJ.0000032035.30738.01
Wennekers, A. R. M.; Uhlaner, L. M.; Thurik, R. 2002.
Entrepreneurship and its conditions: a macro perspective, International
Journal of Entrepreneurship Education 1(1): 25-64.
Zhao, H.; Seibert, S. E. 2006. The big five personality dimensions
and entrepreneurial status: a meta-analytical review, Journal of Applied
Psychology 91(2): 259-271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.9L2.259
(1) The "Big Five" personality attributes toextraversion,
emotional stability, agreeableness, conscientiousness, and openness to
experience provide the measures of the entrepreneur's
personality". (Ciavarella et al. 2003)
(2) Is based on the correlation of particular questions included in
the questionnaire, evaluates whether all questions on the scale reflect
the researched value with sufficient accuracy, and enables itemization
corrections in particular scale.
(3) The "push" effect means that a person chooses
self-employment due to the necessity but not due to the opportunities
emerged.
(4) Time shift from 0 to 4 years was chosen because the scope of
only 12 years was available during the empirical research. Increasing
the time shift, the scope of the researched year was even more reduced
(the longer is time interval, the less data can be compared and the less
reliable results are obtained).
(5) The bound of turnover to start paying the value-added tax is
100 000 Litas. The tariff of the value-added tax in Lithuania is 21 per
cent.
Grazina STARTIENE, Rita REMEIKIENE
Faculty of Economics and Management, Kaunas University of
Technology Laisves al. 55, LT-44309 Kaunas, Lithuania
Received 24 August 2012; accepted 01 December 2012
Corresponding address: R. Remeikiene E-mail: rita.remeikiene@ktu.lt
Grazina STARTIENE. Dr, social sciences (economics), professor of
Kaunas University of Technology, Department of Economics and
International Trade; editor of the journal "Engineering
economics" (ISSN 1392-2785) and chiefeditor of the journal
"Economics and Management" (ISSN 1822-6515); co-author of the
study "Conditions and presumptions of the increase of Lithuanian
business competitiveness" (2011); has published over 50 articles
(together with co-authors) during the last 10 years. The main spheres of
scientific interests: micro and macro economics, international trade,
financing of international trade, international settlement, the risk of
exchange rate.
Rita REMEIKIENE. During the period of 2007-2011, Rita Remeikiene
was a PhD student at Kaunas University of Technology, Faculty of
Economics and Management, Department of Economics and International
Trade. In 2012, she defended the Thesis "The Factors of
Self-employment in Transition Economies" in the sphere of social
sciences, economics. Together with co-authors, she has published over 10
articles during the last five years. Her main research interest:
entrepreneurship, self-employment, employment. Since 2010, Rita
Remeikiene has been working as a lecturer in the Department of Economics
and International Trade. 2013 Volume 19(1): 141-161
Table 1. Elaboration of the impact of bidirectional factors
of self-employment on self-employment duration
Demographical factors
Age Positive effects ("+"):
Georgellis et al. 2007; Professional experience, self-reliance
Praag 2003; and capital accessibility grow with
Georgellis et al. 2005; the age which makes self-employment
Holtz-Eakin et al. 1994; activity sustained. The older is the
Parker 2004. person who starts-up self-employment,
the longer he performs it because
self-employment becomes a perfect
alternative after retirement, i.e.
the experience and competence are
used effectively, maintaining skills
and financial stability.
Self-employment is sustained when it
is led by a middle aged person. Young
people can also develop business
perfectly because they have not
started their families, so their
choice has not been influenced by
other factors (for instance,
maintenance of children or parents).
Negative effects ("-"):
Middle aged people have already
started their families and reached
the top of career which can reduce
the opportunities to start
self-employment from scratch seeking
for a new recognition. The youth,
although being inclined to assume
higher business risk, neither have
enough financial resources to develop
business nor possess the experience
of an entrepreneur. People who have
reached a ripe old age are less
inclined to risk, start-up business
and manage it.
Education Positive effects ("+"):
Henley 2005; Ritsila,
Tervo 2002; Bergmann, People with higher education are
Sternberg 2007; Evans, treated as more successful
Leighton 1989; Cowling, entrepreneurs than other market
Taylor 2001; Wagner, participants because they have
Sternberg 2004; acquired bigger human capital,
Demirguc-Kunt et al. are able to handle business risk,
2007; Georgellis et al. faster perceive labour market
2005; Georgellis et conditions and stay in business
al. 2007; Thomas 2009; longer using their competence.
Falter 2001; Taylor What is more, people with higher
1999; Kangasharju, education are capable of finding
Pekkala 2002; Parker and recognising more profitable
2004. market opportunities and
information. So higher education
enables self-employment
sustainability.
Negative effects ("-"):
Education slightly correlates
with business sustainability since
not all business spheres (for
instance, agriculture, particular
services, wholesale, and
production) require higher
education. Education increases
the level of human capital which
not only enables self-employment
sustainability but also opens more
opportunities to earn
more doing a salaried work.
Previous experience Positive effects ("+"):
of self-employment
Georgellis et al. 2007; Successful previous experience
Joona, Wadensjo 2008; of self-employment is one of
Falter 2001. the most important factors,
determining self-employment
sustain-ability.
Negative effects ("-"):
Unsuccessful previous
experience of self-employment
can be a psychological barrier
which will remind a person that
he can fail again.
Marital status, Positive effects ("+"):
defined by marriage
and children If both spouses are
Borjas 1986; Williams self-employed, it is likely
2004; Georgellis et al. that they will perform their
2007 activities longer seeking for
the common financial
well-being. Children become
a motive to start-up
self-employment.
Negative effects ("-"):
If one of the spouses switches
to wage employment (Georgellis
et al. 2007), the probability
of self-employment sustainability
is lower. Having of small
children also reduces
self-employment duration
considering the fact that
self-employment is often related
to risk, and no one is inclined
to risk at the expense of family.
In general, childcare negatively
influences self-employment
duration, although this tendency
has not been noticed in
all countries.
Immigrants Positive effects ("+"):
Ahn 2009;
Clark, Drinkwater 2010 Eventually (usually after
a year of self-employment
performance),
immigrants learn the local
language and legal
regulations which
reduces the barriers to
develop self-employment.
Negative effects ("-"):
Weak position in labour market,
ignorance of industry
particularities and the lack of
self-employment experience are
significant factors explaining
inability of national minorities
and people of different race to
sustain their activities in
comparison with local
entrepreneurs. The children of the
immigrants neither are inclined
to start-up self-employment nor
help their parents develop it.
The factors of
economic environment
Unemployment rate Positive effects ("+"):
Golpe, Stel 2007;
Verheul et al. 2006; High unemployment rate
Thurik et al. 2008; reduces possibilities to
Parker 2004; find paid employment (Golpe,
Johansson 2000; Stel 2007), so this way an
Muehlberger 2007; individual is motivated to
Glocker, Steiner become self-employed and
2007. develop his activity.
Negative effects ("-"):
High unemployment rate
negatively influences
individual expectations of
self-employment.
GDP Positive effects ("+"):
Spencer, Gomez 2004;
Stel et al. 2005; Stel Higher GDP can show the level
et al. 2003; Parker, of rising economics which
Robson 2004; dis-proportionately positively
Beugelsdijk, influences the level of
Noorderhaven 2004; self-employment.
Galt, Moenning 1996;
Knuth 2006;--Congregado Negative effects ("-"):
et al. 2010; Koellinger,
Thurik 2009. High level of GDP in the
country can determine lower
number of the self-employed
because there are more
opportunities to
find paid employment.
Demographical factors
Tax tariffs Positive effects ("+"):
Briscoe et al. 2000;
Bruce, Mohsin 2006; Positive effects can be caused
Gentry, Hubbard 2000; by high or low income tax
Schuetze 2000; Bruce tariffs, i.e. high tax tariff
2000; Cullen, Gordon makes a person to choose
2002; Fairlie, Meyer self-employment instead of a
2000. paid employment due to more
opportunities to hide taxes and
so increase self-employment
profit; low tax tariff opens
more financial opportunities
to develop self-employment.
Negative effects ("-"):
Negative effects appear when
high income taxes and the
complexity of the tax system
disturb self-employment
development. High taxes "deprive"
self-employment of higher profit.
The factors of
institutional
environment
Promotion programmes Positive effects ("+"):
Dawson et al. 2009;
Noorderhaven 2004; Promotion programmes enable
Hundley 2006; self-employment sustainability
Plougmann 1998; in the market.
Verheul et al. 2001.
Negative effects ("-"):
Promotion programmes do not
guarantee self-employment
sustainability because they
usually support the jobless
who lack of motivation and
the competence necessary for
self-employment development.
Strict regulation of Positive effects ("+"):
labour market Djankov
2009; Grubb, Wells In the countries with strict
1993; Carrasco, Ejrnags labour market regulation,
2003; Verheul et al. enterprises (employers) are
2001. inclined to use the services
provided by independent
contractors, agents or
self-employed people because
this helps to escape the
restrictions of recruiting
an employee.
Negative effects ("-"):
High level of corruption
and black economy cause the
increase of the number of
the self-employed.
Psychological factors
Neuroticism, Positive effects ("+"):
extraversion, openness
Singh, DeNoble 2003; The "Big Five" structure1
Ciavarella et al. 2004; includes the personality
Zhao, Seibert 2006. attributes distinguishing
entrepreneur's personality
from other personalities.
Negative effects ("-"):
The results of the empirical
research revealed the
negative impact of the
personality attributes
mentioned above.
Fig. 1. The factors positively influencing self-employment duration
(percentage of the approving experts)
Financial business 96,7%
promotion
Neuroticism 96,6%
Successful previous 93,4%
self-employment
experience
Openess 93,3%
Extraversion 90%
Non-financial 86,6%
business
promotion
Having older 70%
children
Middle aged people 63,4%
Younger people 63,4%
Education 56,7%
Note: Table made from bar graph.
Fig. 2.The factors negatively influencing self-employment duration
(percentage of the approving experts)
Unemployment rate 43,4%
Strict regulation 90%
of labour market
High income taxes 93,7%
Immigration 43,4%
Note: Table made from bar graph.
