IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v17y2025i13p5774-d1685466.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

It’s Not Just About the Money: What Actually Promotes New Firm Formation? Evidence from Polish Municipalities

Author

Listed:
  • Elżbieta Ociepa-Kicińska

    (Faculty of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Szczecin, 70-453 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Rafał Czyżycki

    (Faculty of Economics, Finance and Management, University of Szczecin, 70-453 Szczecin, Poland)

  • Tomasz Skica

    (Department of Entrepreneurship, University of Information Technology and Management in Rzeszow, 35-225 Rzeszow, Poland)

  • Jacek Rodzinka

    (Department of Financial Markets and Consumer Finance, Faculty of Economics and Finance, University of Rzeszow, 35-959 Rzeszów, Poland)

Abstract

This paper examined whether regional differences in Poland affect the use of various tools for supporting local entrepreneurship. It also verified whether there is a universal set of tools that accounts for the level at which local entrepreneurship support tools are used by municipalities. This study was based on a survey conducted among 882 Polish municipalities. Analyses were carried out using classical measures of descriptive statistics, supplemented by the Mann–Whitney U test and Kruskal–Wallis rank. The results reveal that the likelihood of municipalities with a local spatial development plan (LSDP) use more support instruments is statistically significant. For municipalities, having an LSDP also correlates with higher levels of local entrepreneurship. Moreover, the presence of an LSDP contributes not only to increased local entrepreneurship, but also aligns with long-term, sustainable, spatial and economic development goals. It was concluded that municipalities should be encouraged to create comprehensive development plans and, above all, to develop and implement local spatial development plans. Local decision-makers should must be made aware of the role of the plan and its importance for the level of entrepreneurship in the area. More attention should also be focused on the use of tools aimed at direct cooperation with entrepreneurs.

Suggested Citation

  • Elżbieta Ociepa-Kicińska & Rafał Czyżycki & Tomasz Skica & Jacek Rodzinka, 2025. "It’s Not Just About the Money: What Actually Promotes New Firm Formation? Evidence from Polish Municipalities," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 17(13), pages 1-24, June.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5774-:d:1685466
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5774/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/17/13/5774/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Andrzej Zybała, 2021. "Direct Participation in Poland Compared with Other European Countries," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 1, pages 9-31.
    2. David Audretsch & Maksim Belitski & Sameeksha Desai, 2015. "Entrepreneurship and economic development in cities," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 55(1), pages 33-60, October.
    3. Simeon Djankov & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2002. "The Regulation of Entry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 117(1), pages 1-37.
    4. Hanna Godlewska-Majkowska, 2018. "Investment Attractiveness Of Polish Municipalities In Relation To Local Entrepreneurship," OLSZTYN ECONOMIC JOURNAL, University of Warmia and Mazury in Olsztyn, Faculty of Economic Sciences, vol. 13(2), pages 103-122, May.
    5. Zoltán J. Ács & Pontus Braunerhjelm & David B. Audretsch & Bo Carlsson, 2015. "The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 7, pages 129-144, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    6. Donald Bruce & Mohammed Mohsin, 2006. "Tax Policy and Entrepreneurship: New Time Series Evidence," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 26(5), pages 409-425, June.
    7. Amy Rader Olsson & Hans Westlund & Johan P. Larsson, 2020. "Entrepreneurial Governance and Local Growth," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(9), pages 1-16, May.
    8. Andrea Cayumil Fernández & Miguel Quiroga & Iván Araya & Gabriel Pino, 2022. "Can local financial depth and dependence on external funding impact regional creation of new firms in Chile?," The Annals of Regional Science, Springer;Western Regional Science Association, vol. 68(2), pages 387-406, April.
    9. Sebastian Aparicio & Andreu Turro & Maria Noguera, 2020. "Entrepreneurship and Intrapreneurship in Social, Sustainable, and Economic Development: Opportunities and Challenges for Future Research," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(21), pages 1-11, October.
    10. Aneta Ptak-Chmielewska & Agnieszka Chłoń-Domińczak, 2021. "Spatial Conditions Supporting Sustainable Development of Enterprises on Local Level," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 13(4), pages 1-15, February.
    11. Maša Trinajstić & Marinela Krstinić Nižić & Nada Denona Bogović, 2022. "Business Incentives for Local Economic Development," Economies, MDPI, vol. 10(6), pages 1-12, June.
    12. Zwolinksa-Ligaj, Magdalena Anna & Guzal-Dec, Danuta Jolanta, 2023. "Cooperative Links Between Business in the Context of Local System Resilience. A Case Study of Poland's Peripheral Regions," Roczniki (Annals), Polish Association of Agricultural Economists and Agribusiness - Stowarzyszenie Ekonomistow Rolnictwa e Agrobiznesu (SERiA), vol. 2023(01).
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Maksim Belitski & Farzana Chowdhury & Sameeksha Desai, 2016. "Taxes, corruption, and entry," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 201-216, June.
    2. Kim, Younghwan & Kim, Wonjoon & Yang, Taeyong, 2012. "The effect of the triple helix system and habitat on regional entrepreneurship: Empirical evidence from the U.S," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(1), pages 154-166.
    3. Chuantao Cui & Leona Shao-Zhi Li, 2024. "More but not better: Career incentives of local leaders and entrepreneurial entry in China," Working Papers 202417, University of Macau, Faculty of Business Administration.
    4. Rauch, James E., 2016. "Dynastic entrepreneurship, entry, and non-compete enforcement," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 86(C), pages 188-201.
    5. Alfredo Monte & Luca Pennacchio, 2020. "Historical roots of regional entrepreneurship: the role of knowledge and creativity," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 55(1), pages 1-22, June.
    6. Braunerhjelm, Pontus, 2010. "Entrepreneurship, Innovation and Economic Growth - past experience, current knowledge and policy implications," Working Paper Series in Economics and Institutions of Innovation 224, Royal Institute of Technology, CESIS - Centre of Excellence for Science and Innovation Studies.
    7. Fang Yuan & Shuxiang Wang & Jianjun Sun, 2023. "Intrapreneurial Capabilities: Multidimensional Construction and Measurement Index Validation," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(13), pages 1-21, July.
    8. Dionisio, Eduardo Avancci & Inácio Júnior, Edmundo & Fischer, Bruno Brandão, 2021. "Country-level efficiency and the index of dynamic entrepreneurship: Contributions from an efficiency approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 162(C).
    9. Emanuela Carbonara & Enrico Santarelli & Hien Thu Tran, 2016. "De jure determinants of new firm formation: how the pillars of constitutions influence entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 139-162, June.
    10. Estrin, Saul & Korosteleva, Julia & Mickiewicz, Tomasz, 2013. "Which institutions encourage entrepreneurial growth aspirations?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 28(4), pages 564-580.
    11. Jonathan Levie & Erkko Autio, 2008. "A theoretical grounding and test of the GEM model," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 31(3), pages 235-263, October.
    12. Pekka Stenholm & Zoltán J. Ács & Robert Wuebker, 2015. "Exploring country-level institutional arrangements on the rate and type of entrepreneurial activity," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 20, pages 387-404, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    13. David Urbano & Andreu Turro & Sebastian Aparicio, 2020. "Innovation through R&D activities in the European context: antecedents and consequences," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 45(5), pages 1481-1504, October.
    14. Boudreaux, Christopher & Caudill, Steven, 2019. "Entrepreneurship, Institutions, and Economic Growth: Does the Level of Development Matter?," MPRA Paper 94244, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    15. Prencipe, Antonio & Corsi, Christian & Rodríguez-Gulías, María Jesús & Fernández-López, Sara & Rodeiro-Pazos, David, 2020. "Influence of the regional entrepreneurial ecosystem and its knowledge spillovers in developing successful university spin-offs," Socio-Economic Planning Sciences, Elsevier, vol. 72(C).
    16. Petutschnig, Matthias, 2017. "Future orientation and taxes: Evidence from big data," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 29(C), pages 14-31.
    17. Claire Economidou & Luca Grilli & Magnus Henrekson & Mark Sanders, 2018. "Financial and Institutional Reforms for an Entrepreneurial Society," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 51(2), pages 279-291, August.
    18. Solomon, Shelby J. & Bendickson, Joshua S. & Marvel, Matt R. & McDowell, William C. & Mahto, Raj, 2021. "Agency theory and entrepreneurship: A cross-country analysis," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 122(C), pages 466-476.
    19. David B. Audretsch & Maksim Belitski & Rosa Caiazza & Farzana Chowdhury & Matthias Menter, 2023. "Entrepreneurial growth, value creation and new technologies," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(5), pages 1535-1551, October.
    20. Andrew Godley & Norbert Morawetz & Lebene Soga, 2021. "The complementarity perspective to the entrepreneurial ecosystem taxonomy," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 56(2), pages 723-738, February.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:17:y:2025:i:13:p:5774-:d:1685466. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.