Formal sources of finance boost innovation: Do immigrants benefit as much as natives?

Abstract

The article investigates the relative benefit of formality/informality of finance sources for innovation and compares this benefit amongst immigrant and native entrepreneurs. The authors investigate whether formal finance (here, bank loan) benefit innovation more than informal sources (personal savings and friend/family loan). Then, they explore whether an entrepreneur's status strengthens or weakens the benefit finance sources for innovation. Research Design & Methods:This study applies a quantitative approach to conduct the research. The data of 15,850 entrepreneurs surveyed by Global Entrepreneurship Monitor in 2015 were analysed using the hierarchical linear modelling (HLM) technique. Findings: Results indicated that formal finance benefits innovation more than informal sources, and this advantage is the same for both immigrant and native entrepreneurs. Implications & Recommendations: Despite the prevalence of some stereotypes regarding the simplistic and repetitive nature of immigrants ' businesses, the study recommends that financial institutions and policymakers plan to enhance entrepreneurs ' access to formal financial resources irrespective of their migrant status. Policymakers also can plan to increase the immigrant entrepreneurs ' access to the formal sources of finance by tailored educations to boost innovation. Contribution & Value Added:The results highlight that immigrant entrepreneurs benefit from formal finance towards innovation similarly to their native counterparts. Such a clarification informs the studies on the liability of foreignness and innovation finance that immigration status cannot be a barrier to innovation as portrayed and conceptualized by some studies. Article type:research article

Improving the entrepreneurial ability of rural migrant workers returning home in China: Study based on 5,675 questionnaires

“…And the external environmental factors of entrepreneurial ability of returning migrant workers include: (1) preferential policy; (2) market risk; (3) government support; (4) external financing conditions; (5) industrial restructuring; (6) industry system; (7) industrial technology content; and (8) market competition. This is in line with scholars such as Dabi et al ( 2020 ), Hamilton et al ( 2008 ), Kloosterman et al ( 1998 ), Mazzarol et al ( 1999 ), and Ashourizadeh et al ( 2022 ). Although the indicator system established in this paper is consistent with the current research findings of mainstream scholars, they only focus on a few key factors, which tends to create a “blind spot” in the research perspective.…”

“…Some scholars argue that for returnee entrepreneurs, raising capital through informal economic activities is a feasible and effective approach to solving the lack of venture capital (Kloosterman et al, 1998 ). Some scholars believe that formal finance is more conducive to innovation than informal sources (Ashourizadeh et al, 2022 ). In China, it is less costly and less risky to raise capital from formal financing channels (such as banks), but there would be complicated procedures and a long time to acquire capital; while there would be relatively simpler procedures and immediate acquisition of capital in the informal financing channels (such as private loans), but there would be higher cost and greater risk.…”

“…Mazzarol believes that it would be more comprehensive to study the entrepreneurial ability of entrepreneurs from two aspects: (1) personal characteristics or traits of entrepreneurs; (2) the influence of external factors such as culture, politics, society and economy (Mazzarol et al, 1999 ). Some scholars believe that the government should provide such an external environment, such as entrepreneurship training and policy support for entrepreneurs (Ashourizadeh et al, 2022 ).…”

Cognitions affecting innovation among generation Z entrepreneurs: the external enablement of digital infrastructure

“…Moreover, since we sampled only 25 countries, the country-level controls were added to see any inconsistency within the results. At the country level, data on culture (Martiarena et al ., 2022; Rodríguez-Serrano and Martín-Armario, 2019), availability of finance (Ashourizadeh et al ., 2022; Hechavarría and Ingram, 2019), R&D transfer (Amorós et al ., 2019), economic freedom (Fuentelsaz et al ., 2018), GDP (Vodă et al ., 2020) and normative support for entrepreneurship were inserted. There were no inconsistencies in both scenarios (adding individual and country-level variables), indicating that the results are robust and reliable.…”

Social integration of internally displaced persons in Ukraine: Problems and challenges for governing local communities

“…In the studies devoted to the public administration of local communities and the impact of internal displacement, considerable attention is paid to violations of community development plans (Khymynets & Holovka, 2023) and social justice for the locals in various manifestations. Typical examples are the study of differences in the ease of starting and running a business, the availability of financial resources (Ashourizadeh et al, 2022), and the implementation of social policy (Vučković & Škuflić, 2021;Yurchyk et al, 2023). Such consequences determine the need to improve community development strategies, considering migration (Gavkalova et al, 2023).…”