No abstract

There is no gender difference between success in establishing a business once both males and females have the same preference to self-employment and attempts towards establishing a new business. However, the gender gap tends to be huge when it comes to individual preferences and attempts to start up an entrepreneurial activity. In this study, we empirically estimate the role of inequality in individual and country attributes between man and woman in the bridging the gender entrepreneurship gap. Using Oaxaca-type decomposition and its extensions, we found that differences in both individual as well as country characteristics largely favor males, while the former play greater role in explaining the gender gap. Empirical results also show differences in return to measured characteristics favor males. Nevertheless, a portion of gender gap that is unexplained by the differences in these characteristics and their coefficients (or return) could still indicate gender discrimination.

There is no gender difference between success in establishing a business once both males and females have the same preference to self-employment and attempts towards establishing a new business. However, the gender gap tends to be huge when it comes to individual preferences and attempts to start up an entrepreneurial activity. In this study, we empirically estimate the role of inequality in individual and country attributes between man and woman in the bridging this gender entrepreneurship gap. Using Oaxaca-type decomposition and its extensions on choice of weighting matrix for nonlinear probability models, we found that differences in both individual as well as country characteristics largely favor males, while the former play greater role in explaining the gender gap. About a one third of the gender gap in both latent as well as nascent entrepreneurship can be traced back to females owning smaller endowments than males. Empirical results also show differences in return to measured characteristics favor males. Nevertheless, a portion of gender gap that is unexplained by the differences in these characteristics and their coefficients (or return) could still indicate gender discrimination.

By employing a rich sample of firm-level data in seven Eastern Europe and Central Asian countries from Europe and Central Asia, our paper investigates core as well as some specific determinants of firm innovation. We find that the likelihood of engaging in innovation for a firm increases with its core socio-economic characteristics such as size, age, capacity utilization, domestic competition and foreign ownership. In addition to the estimates of these socio-economic covariates, the ultimate purpose of our study is to obtain more in-depth knowledge about the policy implacable factors for firm innovation that the countries could focus on. These policy-related factors are: (i) access to finance, (ii) human capital, and (iii) foreign trade. In this respect, our study finds that firm's innovation increases with better financial inclusion, greater human capital and engagement in foreign trade. We argue that these analysis and results, coupled with inclusive and targeted policies, can be used to enrich the process of private sector innovation in the region's countries.

Abstrac'-Two models of the inca-action between n:gional fuwlcial markets and regional production are examined. The fD"st uswnea that n:gional expenditures are determined by the regional intezeat rate, malogous to national IS-LM macroeconomic models. The second uswnes that n:gional expenditures 1re c:anatrlinod by the availability of regional credit available through fmancial nwkets. The first model implies regional financial markets have no effect on n:gional growth if financial capital is perfectly mobile.However, the second model indicates regional growth is affected by regional fuwtcial markets. This difference is tested using gross product and commercial bUlk loan data for states from 1965 to 1985. A two-step procedure is used that (1) estimates the structural coefficients for each state through time series analysis, then (2) tests the explanatory power of these coefficients in a cross-section analysis of state growth rates. This analysis indicates that regional financial markets exhibit a positive impact on regional growth. I. INTRODUCTIONAnalyses of regional financial marlc.ets by Moore and Hill (1982), Dow (1987), and Harrigan and McGregor (1987 suggest, contrary to conventional assumptions, that imperfect mobility of financial capital places constraints on the growth of regional economies. This is in contrast to most regional analyses that assume fmancial capital is extremely, if not perfectly, mobile among regions. 1be assumption of perfectly mobile fmancial capital implies that less mobile physical capital, natural resources, and labor are more important constraints to regional growth and thus more deserving of study.Recent trends in bank closings in the United States provide insight into the question of financial capital mobility. Between 1982 and 1988, 807 banks were closed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation in the 50 states. 1 Texas led the way with 217 bank closings, followed by Oklahoma with 92 and Kansas with 50. These three states, contiguously located in the south central plains, accounted for 44.5 percent of the total. In contrast, there were 10 states, primarily located in the east, that experienced no bank closings during this period.