Smuggling and small‐scale trade as part of informal economic practices

Abstract

Purpose -Using small-scale cross-border trade and smuggling as an example of an informal practice carried out in many post-socialist countries, the purpose of this paper is to explore which different meanings this activity possesses for the people being involved in it and in how far small-scale cross-border trade is being accepted and looked at by society. The authors hope to show the different connections between informal and formal activities and specificities of localities which people in the mentioned countries deploy when trying to secure their livelihood. Design/methodology/approach -The authors used a qualitative empirical research including group discussions with small-scale traders and small entrepreneurs, expert interviews with representatives of the border authorities and systematic observations at border crossing points and open-air markets at the Finnish-Russian, Polish-Ukrainian, Polish-Belarusian and Ukrainina-Romanian borders. Findings -The paper provides empirical insights about why people carry out smuggling and small-scale trade and how these informal activities are perceived in the local environment. It suggests that informal economic cross-border activities are often highly legitimized despite their illegal character. The border creates certain extra opportunities as it enables arbitrage dealings. Rather as a side effect though, the Schengen visa regime has evoked a decreasing profit margin of transborder economic activities. Therefore, it remains unclear whether the Eastern external EU border will serve as an informal economic resource in the future. Originality/value -Thanks to a multisited qualitative approach to a very sensitive research topic, the paper allows empirical insights into meanings and uses of smuggling and cross-border small-scale trade.

Entrepreneurial activity in the informal economy: a missing piece of the entrepreneurship jigsaw puzzle

“…Also, the boundaries between what considers illicit activities and informal activities, frequently used to theorize informal entrepreneurship (Godfrey 2011;Webb et al 2009), are fuzzy and permeable as has been shown for the case of crossborder entrepreneurship and petty trading (Bruns et al 2011;Karjanen 2011;Welter and Xheneti 2013).…”

Tackling enterprise in the informal economy: an introductory overview

“…It would also enable a "high road" rather than "low road" approach by shifting toward greater regulatory standards on working conditions such as health and safety and labour standards (Grabiner, 2000;Renooy et al, 2004;Williams and Windebank, 1998). Meanwhile, for informal enterprises, the key benefits are that they escape the pressure to enter exploitative relationships with the formal economy (Gallin, 2001;Williams and Windebank, 1998) and achieve the same levels of legal protection as formal enterprises (Boels, 2014;Bruns et al, 2011;ILO, 2014;Morris and Polese, 2014). They are also able to secure formal intellectual property rights for their products and processes (De Beer et al, 2013) and overcome the structural impediments that prevent them growing, such as their lack of access to advice and support as well as capital (ILO, 2014).…”

Informal Cross-Border Trade Sarawak (Malaysia)-Kalimantan (Indonesia): A Catalyst for Border Community’s Development

“…The main reasons are interested in business, gain better income and prefer to be self-employed. The same situation occurs in the research carried out among informal cross-border traders between South Africa and the neighboring countries (Peberdy, 2000) and Eastern external European Union borders (Bruns, Miggelbrink & Muller, 2011) whereby respondents are also primarily driven by the income-earning opportunities available. The involvement of informal cross-border trade between Mozambique and its neighbours is also to gain extra income whilst informal cross-border traders in Zimbabwe are mainly driven by friendship (Muzvidziwa, 2001).…”