Impact of public intervention on micro and small enterprises performance in Ethiopia

Abstract

Purpose The effectiveness of any government interventions to support small firms is always a concern in achieving improvements in enterprise performances. The purpose of this paper is to evaluate thoroughly the impact of micro and small enterprises’ (MSEs’) support programs on core intermediate and final outcomes of interest. Design/methodology/approach The impact evaluation employs a non-parametric matching procedure for parametric outcome analysis using the propensity score matching (PSM) method. Aiming at a doubly robust evaluation process, the study applies parametric analyses than non-parametric permutation-based tests to investigate the causal effects of the public intervention. Findings The study reveals that the public intervention encouraged MSEs to develop innovative business practices and improve their human capital development process. Moreover, the intervention had a positive effect in expanding employment opportunities in urban areas. Contrariwise, the study shows that support beneficiaries are not at an advantage in investment intensity. The lower level of investment intensity on fixed capital resulted inefficiency among the recipients. Moreover, the intervention did not have an effect on changing the net-asset over time for the recipients. Practical implications This study implies that the support programs need to be dynamic and also targets on creating innovative high-growth MSEs. Originality/value This paper is fairly original and provides policy makers and MSE promoters/facilitators evidence-based information on the effectiveness of the support services, with looking at firm-level analysis.

The Effect of Integrated Entrepreneurship Development on the Performance of MSMEs in DKI Jakarta during the Pandemic Period

“…The Program Intensity variable shows positive and significant values throughout 2020 to 2022, indicating that an increase of 1 program attended can increase business profits by 20.4% in 2020, 20.5% in 2021, and 8.67% in 2022. These findings are the same with the research by Yonis et al (2018), which found that participating in government programs can encourage MSMEs to foster innovative business approaches and enhance resource development procedures. This can also be seen in Table 3, where participants who attended all programs had the highest average profits.…”

Socioeconomic determinants of micro and small enterprise growth in North Wollo and Waghimira Zone selected towns

“…This result assured that the youngest owners' enterprises were more successful than the other group. This finding is consistent with the finding of Yonis et al (2018), but contradicts with the result of Aworemi et al (2010). Therefore, the age of the owners was able to predict the growth of MSEs.…”

“…The old people may be engaged in different responsibilities, and they may reject the activities of their business. As cited by Yonis et al (2018), there is a negative relationship between the performances of MSEs with the age of the owners. The young owners become successful than the old ones (Nejati et al, 2014).…”

“…The MSE owners are well educated; they can manage the enterprises properly and can predict the risks that will happen. Education matters for the survival of the enterprises (Solomon, 2004;Yonis et al, 2018). As cited by Afande (2015), education is the factor that positively affects the growth of the firms (King & McGrath, 2002).…”

The Impact of Public Grants on Firm-Level Productivity: Findings from the Czech Food Industry

“…Despite the growing body of literature investigating the investment support policy contribution to competitiveness and efficiency of subsidised firms, e.g., references [21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30], the minority of studies focuses specifically on productivity effects, e.g., references [31][32][33][34][35]. The productivity assessment using only the labour productivity indicator, as common in a number of studies, e.g., references [25,[36][37][38][39][40], may bias the overall productivity effects. Bernini et al [32] argue that labour productivity may increase because of the capital deepening induced by the subsidy, whereas the efficiency of all inputs used may not increase at all.…”