IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/
MyIDEAS: Login to save this paper or follow this series

Entry Regulation and Entrepreneurship: Empirical Evidence from a German Natural Experiment

  • Davud Rostam-Afschar

The amendment to the German Trade and Crafts Code in 2004 offers a natural experiment to asses the causal effects of this reform on the probabilities of being self-employed and transition into and out of self-employment, using cross-sections (2002-2006) of German microcensus data. This study applies the difference-in-differences technique in logit models for four occupational groups. Easing the educational entry requirement has fostered self-employment significantly for less qualified craftsmen, almost doubling the entry probability, even as exit rates remained unaffected. Weaker effects occur for other occupational groups. These findings have implications for the design of regulations with educational requirements.

If you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.

File URL: http://www.diw.de/documents/publikationen/73/diw_01.c.362094.de/dp1065.pdf
Download Restriction: no

Paper provided by DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research in its series Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin with number 1065.

as
in new window

Length: 37 p.
Date of creation: 2010
Date of revision:
Handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp1065
Contact details of provider: Postal: Mohrenstraße 58, D-10117 Berlin
Phone: xx49-30-89789-0
Fax: xx49-30-89789-200
Web page: http://www.diw.de/en
Email:


More information through EDIRC

References listed on IDEAS
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:

as in new window
  1. Simeon Djankov & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-De-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2002. "The Regulation Of Entry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 117(1), pages 1-37, February.
  2. Blundell, Richard & Costa Dias, Monica, 2008. "Alternative Approaches to Evaluation in Empirical Microeconomics," IZA Discussion Papers 3800, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  3. Akerlof, George A, 1970. "The Market for 'Lemons': Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500, August.
  4. Olivier Blanchard & Francesco Giavazzi, 2003. "Macroeconomic Effects Of Regulation And Deregulation In Goods And Labor Markets," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, MIT Press, vol. 118(3), pages 879-907, August.
  5. Puhani, Patrick A., 2012. "The treatment effect, the cross difference, and the interaction term in nonlinear “difference-in-differences” models," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 115(1), pages 85-87.
  6. André Stel & David Storey & A. Thurik, 2007. "The Effect of Business Regulations on Nascent and Young Business Entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 28(2), pages 171-186, March.
  7. Marco Caliendo & Viktor Steiner, 2005. "Aktive Arbeitsmarktpolitik in Deutschland: Bestandsaufnahme und Bewertung der mikroökonomischen Evaluationsergebnisse," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 515, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  8. Caliendo, Marco & Künn, Steffen, 2011. "Start-up subsidies for the unemployed: Long-term evidence and effect heterogeneity," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 95(3), pages 311-331.
  9. Ciccone, Antonio & Papaioannou, Elias, 2007. "Red tape and delayed entry," Working Paper Series 0758, European Central Bank.
  10. Blanchflower, D.G. & Oswald, A., 1991. "What Makes an Entrepreneur?," Economics Series Working Papers 99125, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  11. Frank M. Fossen, 2008. "The Private Equity Premium Puzzle Revisited: New Evidence on the Role of Heterogeneous Risk Attitudes," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 839, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  12. Rostam-Afschar, Davud, 2010. "Entry regulation and entrepreneurship: Empirical evidence from a German natural experiment," Discussion Papers 2010/24, Free University Berlin, School of Business & Economics.
  13. Susanne Prantl, 2012. "The impact of firm entry regulation on long-living entrants," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 61-76, July.
  14. Hans J. Baumgartner & Marco Caliendo & Viktor Steiner, 2006. "Existenzgründungsförderung für Arbeitslose: erste Evaluationsergebnisse für Deutschland," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 75(3), pages 32-48.
  15. Holtz-Eakin Douglas & Rosen Harvey S, 2005. "Cash Constraints and Business Start-Ups: Deutschmarks Versus Dollars," The B.E. Journal of Economic Analysis & Policy, De Gruyter, vol. 4(1), pages 1-28, February.
  16. Rostam-Afschar, Davud, 2012. "Entry Regulation and Entrepreneurship," Annual Conference 2012 (Goettingen): New Approaches and Challenges for the Labor Market of the 21st Century 62067, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
  17. Miriam Bruhn, 2011. "License to Sell: The Effect of Business Registration Reform on Entrepreneurial Activity in Mexico," The Review of Economics and Statistics, MIT Press, vol. 93(1), pages 382-386, February.
  18. Silvia Ardagna & Annamaria Lusardi, 2009. "Where does regulation hurt? Evidence from new businesses across countries," NBER Working Papers 14747, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  19. Susanne Prantl & Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2009. "How does entry regulation influence entry into self-employment and occupational mobility?," The Economics of Transition, The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development, vol. 17(4), pages 769-802, October.
  20. Meyer, Bruce D, 1995. "Natural and Quasi-experiments in Economics," Journal of Business & Economic Statistics, American Statistical Association, vol. 13(2), pages 151-61, April.
  21. Erik Hurst & Annamaria Lusardi, 2004. "Liquidity Constraints, Household Wealth, and Entrepreneurship," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 112(2), pages 319-347, April.
  22. Evans, David S & Jovanovic, Boyan, 1989. "An Estimated Model of Entrepreneurial Choice under Liquidity Constraints," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 97(4), pages 808-27, August.
  23. Klapper, Leora & Laeven, Luc & Rajan, Raghuram, 2006. "Entry regulation as a barrier to entrepreneurship," Journal of Financial Economics, Elsevier, vol. 82(3), pages 591-629, December.
Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

This item is not listed on Wikipedia, on a reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.

When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:diw:diwwpp:dp1065. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Bibliothek)

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 references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.

If the full references list an item that is present in RePEc, but the system did not link 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 profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

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

This information is provided to you by IDEAS at the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis using RePEc data.