Mixed embeddedness

Abstract

Kloosterman, van der Leun and Rath assert they conceptualised the “mixed embeddedness” hypothesis to overcome the shortcomings characteristic of earlier theoretical models of immigrant business enterprise. This article assesses the relevance of this theoretical perspective to explaining immigrant entrepreneurship in a specific host setting with reference to research that spans a number of economic periods and includes both genders and a number of generations. It is argued that, while the “mixed embeddedness” explanation gives a more comprehensive explanation than previous models, it nonetheless fails to explain the wide‐ranging inter‐ethnic variation in entrepreneurial concentration observed among immigrant groups around the world. It contends that the reasons for this are the model’s lack of historical perspective and focus on the lower end of the market. It also demonstrates how the study of immigrant enterprise is advanced by incorporating the agency of individuals into the explanatory process.

Ethnic boundary dynamics in immigrant entrepreneurship: a Barthian perspective

“…In the context of transnational economic activities, yet other scholars make the case for a 'simultaneous embeddedness' perspective that considers these factors in both the host and home country of migrants (Nazareno, Zhou, and You 2019). Another opportunity lies in developing more micro-processual approaches that focus on actual entrepreneurial activities (Peters 2002;Storti 2014;Wang and Warn 2018), whichsurprisingly considering the subject matterhave largely been neglected in immigrant entrepreneurship literature to date (Dheer 2018;Jones and Ram 2007;Ma et al 2013). By developing a Barthian perspective, in this paper we respond especially to this latter opportunity to advance the mixed embeddedness literature, but first we will discuss representations of ethnic boundaries in immigrant entrepreneurship literature.…”

“…In studies on immigrant entrepreneurship, however, Barth's work is seldom used beyond passing reference (e.g. Dana and Morris 2007;Heberer 2005;Nee, Sanders, and Sernau 1994;Koning and Verver 2013;Peters 2002). Below, we present Barth's work on entrepreneurship (1963), spheres of value ([1967] 2000) and ethnic boundaries (1969).…”

“…By fleshing out a Barthian perspective, our contribution is twofold. First, we respond to calls for more micro-processual approaches to mixed embeddedness (Peters 2002;Storti 2014;Wang and Warn 2018), recognizing that a dominant focus on outcomes at the ethnic group level has left the processes by which migrant business ventures are formed understudied (Dheer 2018). Our second contribution lies in a critical reappraisal of the role of ethnic boundaries in immigrant entrepreneurship.…”

Classical approaches and contemporary theoretical models of explaining ethnic entrepreneurship

“…30 Концепт комбиноване укорењености је доживео значајне критике. У литератури се обично наводи како овај модел не објашњава ништа више од интерактивног модела (Peters, 2002). Поред тога, замера му се недостатак историјске перспективе у смислу да се модел не фокусира на темпорални аспект појаве.…”

“…30 The concept of combined embeddedness has been substantially criticized. In the literature, it is usually stated that this model does not explain anything more than the interactive model does (Peters, 2002). Moreover, it is criticized because of its lack of historical perspective in the sense that the model is not focused on the temporal aspect of the phenomenon.…”