IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0252292.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A framework to measure the taxonomic of economic anchor: A case study of the Three Seas Initiative countries

Author

Listed:
  • Magdalena Kozera-Kowalska
  • Jarosław Uglis
  • Jarosław Lira

Abstract

This research is aimed at determining the characteristics of the current level of entrepreneurial potential of the Three Seas Initiative (3SI) countries, the ability to overcome the consequences of extraordinary events, such as COVID-19 and prospects for the return to an accelerated development once the destabiliser of the economic system, the coronavirus pandemic, has ceased. Eurostat, World Bank and the World Economic Forum data for 2015–2019 were used for the purpose of the research. The research was divided into three stages, i.e. assessment of economic development on the basis of a synthetic ratio of economic anchor development, for which a relative benchmark method based on spatial median (so-called L1 median or Weber point) was used, identification of conditions for the development of entrepreneurial capacity and statistical analysis showing the correlation between economic anchor measures and selected factors of the 3SI countries economic development. Our study found that the entrepreneurial capacity of the 3SI countries in 2015–2019 was determined by nine characteristics, belonging to six areas, i.e. local economy, demographic situation, social situation, trade exchange, innovation and tourism economy. The entrepreneurial potential of the 3SI countries was spatially diversified, and its development was determined, among others, by the entrepreneurial activity of residents (entrepreneurship index) and the conditions for running a business.

Suggested Citation

  • Magdalena Kozera-Kowalska & Jarosław Uglis & Jarosław Lira, 2021. "A framework to measure the taxonomic of economic anchor: A case study of the Three Seas Initiative countries," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 16(5), pages 1-24, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0252292
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0252292
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252292
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0252292&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0252292?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Norris F. Krueger Jr. & Deborah V. Brazeal, 1994. "Entrepreneurial Potential and Potential Entrepreneurs," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, , vol. 18(3), pages 91-104, April.
    2. Zoltán J. Ács & Erkko Autio & László Szerb, 2015. "National Systems of Entrepreneurship: Measurement issues and policy implications," Chapters, in: Global Entrepreneurship, Institutions and Incentives, chapter 28, pages 523-541, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    3. Ichino, Andrea & Favero, Carlo A. & Rustichini, Aldo, 2020. "Restarting the economy while saving lives under Covid-19," CEPR Discussion Papers 14664, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    4. George Panagakos & Harilaos N. Psaraftis & Even Ambros Holte, 2015. "Green Corridors and Their Possible Impact on the European Supply Chain," International Series in Operations Research & Management Science, in: Chung-Yee Lee & Qiang Meng (ed.), Handbook of Ocean Container Transport Logistics, edition 127, chapter 18, pages 521-550, Springer.
    5. Jing Xiao & Ron Boschma & Martin Andersson, 2018. "Industrial Diversification in Europe: The Differentiated Role of Relatedness," Economic Geography, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 94(5), pages 514-549, October.
    6. Holger Strulik & Jacob Weisdorf, 2008. "Population, food, and knowledge: a simple unified growth theory," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 195-216, September.
    7. Matteo Sostero & Santo Milasi & John Hurley & Enrique Fernandez-Macias & Martina Bisello, 2020. "Teleworkability and the COVID-19 crisis: a new digital divide?," JRC Working Papers on Labour, Education and Technology 2020-05, Joint Research Centre.
    8. Haroon Mumtaz & Paolo Surico, 2012. "Evolving International Inflation Dynamics: World And Country-Specific Factors," Journal of the European Economic Association, European Economic Association, vol. 10(4), pages 716-734, August.
    9. Krugman, Paul, 1998. "What's New about the New Economic Geography?," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 14(2), pages 7-17, Summer.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Anna Jęczmyk & Jarosław Uglis & Jan Zawadka & Joanna Pietrzak-Zawadka & Monika Małgorzata Wojcieszak-Zbierska & Magdalena Kozera-Kowalska, 2023. "Impact of COVID-19 Pandemic on Tourist Travel Risk Perception and Travel Behaviour: A Case Study of Poland," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 20(8), pages 1-20, April.
    2. George Martinidis & Arkadiusz Dyjakon & Stanisław Minta & Rafał Ramut, 2022. "Intellectual Capital and Sustainable S3 in the Regions of Central Macedonia and Western Macedonia, Greece," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(16), pages 1-17, August.

    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. Mario Rosique-Blasco & Antonia Madrid-Guijarro & Domingo García-Pérez-de-Lema, 2018. "The effects of personal abilities and self-efficacy on entrepreneurial intentions," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 1025-1052, December.
    2. Franziska Sohns & Dariusz Wójcik, 2020. "The impact of Brexit on London’s entrepreneurial ecosystem: The case of the FinTech industry," Environment and Planning A, , vol. 52(8), pages 1539-1559, November.
    3. Jianhong Zhang & Désirée Gorp & Henk Kievit, 2023. "Digital technology and national entrepreneurship: An ecosystem perspective," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 48(3), pages 1077-1105, June.
    4. Aparicio, Sebastian & Urbano, David & Stenholm, Pekka, 2021. "Attracting the entrepreneurial potential: A multilevel institutional approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 168(C).
    5. Aparicio, Sebastian & Audretsch, David & Urbano, David, 2021. "Why is export-oriented entrepreneurship more prevalent in some countries than others? Contextual antecedents and economic consequences," Journal of World Business, Elsevier, vol. 56(3).
    6. Francesco Ceresia, 2018. "The Role of Entrepreneurship Education in Fostering Entrepreneurial Intentions and Performances: A Review of 30 Years of Research," Revista Equidad y Desarrollo, Universidad de la Salle, issue 31, pages 47-66.
    7. Emami, Amir & Yoruk, Esin & Jones, Paul, 2023. "The interplay between market need urgency, entrepreneurial push and pull insights and opportunity confidence in the course of new venture creation in the developing country context," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    8. David Urbano & Sebastian Aparicio & David Audretsch, 2019. "Twenty-five years of research on institutions, entrepreneurship, and economic growth: what has been learned?," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 53(1), pages 21-49, June.
    9. Philip Cooke, 2002. "Biotechnology Clusters as Regional, Sectoral Innovation Systems," International Regional Science Review, , vol. 25(1), pages 8-37, January.
    10. Dietrich Vollrath, 2009. "The dual economy in long-run development," Journal of Economic Growth, Springer, vol. 14(4), pages 287-312, December.
    11. Aidis, Ruta & van Praag, Mirjam, 2007. "Illegal entrepreneurship experience: Does it make a difference for business performance and motivation?," Journal of Business Venturing, Elsevier, vol. 22(2), pages 283-310, March.
    12. R. Sandra Schillo & Ajax Persaud & Meng Jin, 2016. "Entrepreneurial readiness in the context of national systems of entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 46(4), pages 619-637, April.
    13. Elgin, Ceyhun, 2012. "A Theory Of Economic Development With Endogenous Fertility," Macroeconomic Dynamics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(5), pages 686-705, November.
    14. David Finck & Peter Tillmann, 2022. "The Role of Global and Domestic Shocks for Inflation Dynamics: Evidence from Asia," Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, Department of Economics, University of Oxford, vol. 84(5), pages 1181-1208, October.
    15. Rajko Tomaš, 2022. "Measurement of the Concentration of Potential Quality of Life in Local Communities," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 163(1), pages 79-109, August.
    16. Leonidas A. Zampetakis & Manolis Lerakis & Konstantinos Kafetsios & Vassilis S. Moustakis, 2016. "The moderating role of anticipated affective ambivalence in the formation of entrepreneurial intentions," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 12(3), pages 815-838, September.
    17. James Foreman-Peck & Peng Zhou, 2021. "Fertility versus productivity: a model of growth with evolutionary equilibria," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(3), pages 1073-1104, July.
    18. James Foreman-Peck & Peng Zhou, 2021. "Fertility versus productivity: a model of growth with evolutionary equilibria," Journal of Population Economics, Springer;European Society for Population Economics, vol. 34(3), pages 1073-1104, July.
    19. Gaetano Basso & Tito Boeri & Alessandro Caiumi & Marco Paccagnella, 2020. "The new hazardous jobs and worker reallocation," OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers 247, OECD Publishing.
    20. Fayolle, Alain & Liñán, Francisco, 2014. "The future of research on entrepreneurial intentions," Journal of Business Research, Elsevier, vol. 67(5), pages 663-666.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0252292. 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.