Une fabrique publique d’entrepreneurs schumpétériens en France (1971-1978)

Robert Mondavi is one of those entrepreneurs who succeed in everything they do. The United States has produced a plethora of such shining examples in every field, from Rockefeller in oil, and Bill Gates in IT, to Jeff Bezos, the founder of Amazon. Economists call such men ‘Schumpeterian entrepreneurs’, after Joseph Schumpeter, an Austrian who was one of the first to establish that the wealth of an economy depends on innovation and the capacity of its businessmen to get things going. A Schumpeterian entrepreneur is someone who dreams of founding an empire, a dynasty that will reign over his chosen sector for many decades.

Fiscal and monetary institutions are conspicuously omitted in the conventional theory of long-run economic growth. Moving from the Schumpeterian entrepreneur, who adopts new technology because its value, according to Tobin’s q, dominates the economic rents of existing capital, we argue that the Schumpeterian entrepreneur’s incentives to innovate change when he is transplanted into the public economy. We analyze two alternative institutional settings denoted as “long chain” and “short chain”. Through the “long chain” model we show that the Schumpeterian entrepreneur is driven towards “destructive creation” of new capital, thus becoming a political dis-entrepreneur, while the quasi-contractual “short chain” model provides incentives to innovate.

Opportunity evaluation is a very important part of entrepreneurial activity; however, entrepreneurs’ individual differences in evaluating opportunities have been neglected in prior research. To address this gap, we apply institutional theory and stereotype threat theory to explain how some institutional factors differentiate entrepreneurs’ opportunity evaluation process. More specifically, we explore how external institutional factors, such as political and social factors, along with personal institutional factors, such as family influences, affect the opportunity evaluation of entrepreneurs under various cultural backgrounds, specifically China and the United States. The Schumpeterian entrepreneur, in which radical innovation and the desire to significantly upend market equilibria, frames our discussion. This paper contributes to the theoretical understanding of the factors influencing entrepreneurial opportunity evaluation from a comparative culture perspective and to the comparative international entrepreneurship field by building a comparative evaluation framework that summarizes institutional factors influencing Chinese and American entrepreneurs’ opportunity evaluation. We propose that policy, social value, and belief as well as family will have significant impacts on entrepreneurs’opportunity evaluation. We further propose several cultural constructs such as individualism vs. collectivism, uncertainty avoidance, and Confucian work dynamism will moderate the relationship with institutional factors in influencing an entrepreneur’s opportunity evaluation process. We discuss our implications with attention given to how our comparative evaluation framework provides insights into why China and the United States differ in terms of developing Schumpeterian entrepreneurs. We then discuss the framework’s limitations.

In times of economic downturn, entrepreneurship discourse returns to the forefront. In this context, in Brazil, there is a new economic and social phenomenon going on: street ventures as family firms. Once marginalized and normally related to informal work, now they perform activities in the market that allow them to offer higher quality products and to reach consumers with higher purchasing power. Aiming to better understand the phenomenon, this study explores the main aspects that characterize entrepreneurship, its motivations, knowledge and capacity for innovation. A participant observation was carried out analyzing the operation of 44 food trucks and in-depth interviews were conducted with 11 food trucks owners. Results indicate that, unlike the literature premise, the first entrant food trucks were Schumpeterian entrepreneurs. However, there was a dissemination of knowledge and they lost this condition. As a result, suggestions are presented to these entrepreneurs return to the Schumpeterian condition. This paper advances in theoretical knowledge by identifying that the Schumpeterian innovation of this street entrepreneurship is highly geographic-contextual. It possible can lead to a decrease in the risk of business failure in places in which knowledge is disseminated as innovation.

When Spain began the transition from the Old Regime to liberalism, the business career of the Marquis of Sargadelos was unique. In an institutional scenario in which being a ‘profit seeker’ was an almost indispensable prerequisite to overcoming the steep barriers to the entry of manufacturing initiatives, and in a society where the capital accumulated in commercial and manufacturing ventures was diverted to the purchase of rural land, Ibáñez was an exception to the norm in two senses: first, for his willingness to take a risk on new industries, and second, for his efforts to update the available technology. It is in this sense that he might be described as a ‘Schumpeterian entrepreneur’. The aim of this article is to consider Ibáñez’s business career from a new perspective, both what it has in common with the classical business cycle of the time and the unique features of his industrial initiatives.

The Relevance of Quantity and Quality Entrepreneurship for Regional Performance: The Moderating Role of the Entrepreneurial Ecosystem

Differentiating various types of entrepreneurs provides clues to the puzzle of why vertical or top-down policies often fail to create Schumpeterian entrepreneurship and the ecosystems where it thrives. Schumpeterian entrepreneurship is intrinsically contrarian, whereas public policy has a bias toward incremental innovation and replication of past success. If central planners knew what the next radical innovation would be, there would be no need for Schumpeterian entrepreneurs. Schumpeterian entrepreneurs create not only companies but also institutions in the entrepreneurial support system. These ever-evolving structures are too complex to design, and central planning instead reduces the space for organic institutional innovation.

The city and high-tech startups: The spatial organization of Schumpeterian entrepreneurship

Poor economic growth in many countries can be explained by the misallocation of entrepreneurial resources to activities that do not foster growth. This paper deals with the relation between the distribution of political power, the allocation of entrepreneurial resources and growth. We model growth as deriving from Schumpeterian entrepreneurs who try to increase profits through innovation. We endogenize the choice of time devoted to this activity vis‐a‐vis other ways of increasing income, such as obtaining government subsidies. More unequal access to the political redistribution mechanism makes rent‐seeking activities less profitable, and results in higher growth.

Innovative entrepreneurship is considered an important pillar for economic development and has sparked a lively discussion in academia and practice alike. Oftentimes, however, the debate is not sufficiently grounded on solid empirical evidence. The academic literature is growing but very scattered and is separated into several disciplines. We provide a summary that takes stock of the academic knowledge about innovative entrepreneurship and summarizes the evidence from 102 empirical studies published in the primary economics and management journals on the antecedents, behavior, and consequences of innovative entrepreneurship. Based on this state-of-the-art literature review, directions for future research are discussed.

Beyond Simple Profit Maximization in Uncertain Markets: How Innovation and Entry Change Supply Curves and Producer Surplus

The new-thinking is growing up as a contemporary entrepreneurial concept.So, the new-business establishment has been changed a lot of after the Schumpeterian entrepreneur has been set.The business proof of this newer type of entrepreneurs is the phenomenon "START-UP"a new business with high growth potential.The social-economy proof of "Startup" concept is the development of EU policies and strategies that include instruments concerned of this type of new-born business.According to the above, the paper is structured as follows: Introduction: the basic research thesis is given, 1.State of art: defining the problem.Summary of the most used definition of "Start Up" and "new high potential business" are given in this paragraph; 2.Effects of start-ups: some figures from the good World and EU practices.Some positive impacts on the economic growth are represented, explained and discussed; Conclusions: summary of the knowledge of Start-Up impact on growth is given.

The institutional conditions by which appropriate technology and human resources are effectively combined with capital accumulation for promoting industrial development are examined in this chapter. A conclusion is that government investment in scientific research and education is a necessary but not the sufficient condition. Sustained industrial development requires the organization of competitive markets that facilitate innovations by Schumpeterian entrepreneurs.

Science-Based Business: Knowledge Capital or Entrepreneurial Ability? Theory and Evidence from a Survey of Biotechnology Start-Ups

This paper analyzes Schumpeter’s concept of the entrepreneur in comparison to Kirzner and the Austrian School of Economics. For this purpose, the research uses the original German text as the reference, both the first larger edition of 1911 and the later shorter editions (mainly the seventh edition of 1987, which is an unaltered reprint of the fourth edition of 1934). To elaborate on the differences and similarities between Schumpeter and the Austrian approach, the study focuses on the aspects of equilibrium, discovery, speculation, capital, profit, institutions, and development. The analysis shows how the entrepreneur acts as the motor of economic development and how profit and profit expectations serve as the motifs of entrepreneurial action – both for the pioneer of innovation and the imitators. Different from the Austrian School, Schumpeter applies the concept of equilibrium in the neoclassical sense as the starting point of his dynamic analysis. The Schumpeterian entrepreneur is that economic actor who breaks the statics to push the economy toward development, which is not merely economic growth because development signifies that fundamental changes of the economy take place in the process.