IDEAS home Printed from
MyIDEAS: Log in (now much improved!) to save this paper

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:
Download Restriction: no

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

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:

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. Frank M. Fossen, 2011. "The Private Equity Premium Puzzle Revisited—New Evidence on the Role of Heterogeneous Risk Attitudes," Economica, London School of Economics and Political Science, vol. 78(312), pages 656-675, October.
  2. Susanne Prantl & Alexandra Spitz-Oener, 2009. "How does entry regulation influence entry into self-employment and occupational mobility?," IFS Working Papers W09/14, Institute for Fiscal Studies.
  3. Davud Rostam-Afschar, 2010. "Entry Regulation and Entrepreneurship: Empirical Evidence from a German Natural Experiment," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 1065, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
  4. Bruce D. Meyer, 1994. "Natural and Quasi- Experiments in Economics," NBER Technical Working Papers 0170, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  5. George A. Akerlof, 1970. "The Market for "Lemons": Quality Uncertainty and the Market Mechanism," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 84(3), pages 488-500.
  6. Puhani P-A., 2010. "The Treatment Effect, the Cross Difference, and the Interaction Term in Nonlinear “Difference-in-Differences” Models," Working Papers ERMES 1004, ERMES, University Paris 2.
  7. Blanchflower, D.G. & Oswald, A., 1991. "What Makes an Entrepreneur?," Economics Series Working Papers 99125, University of Oxford, Department of Economics.
  8. Susanne Prantl, 2012. "The impact of firm entry regulation on long-living entrants," Small Business Economics, Springer, vol. 39(1), pages 61-76, July.
  9. Blundell, Richard & Costa Dias, Monica, 2008. "Alternative Approaches to Evaluation in Empirical Microeconomics," IZA Discussion Papers 3800, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  10. Caliendo, Marco & Künn, Steffen, 2010. "Start-Up Subsidies for the Unemployed: Long-Term Evidence and Effect Heterogeneity," IZA Discussion Papers 4790, Institute for the Study of Labor (IZA).
  11. Olivier Blanchard & Francesco Giavazzi, 2001. "Macroeconomic Effects of Regulation and Deregulation in Goods and Labor Markets," NBER Working Papers 8120, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
  12. Simeon Djankov & Rafael La Porta & Florencio Lopez-de-Silanes & Andrei Shleifer, 2002. "The Regulation of Entry," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 117(1), pages 1-37.
  13. 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.
  14. Antonio Ciccone & Elias Papaioannou, 2006. "Red tape and delayed entry," Economics Working Papers 985, Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra.
  15. Douglas Holtz-Eakin & Harvey Rosen, 1999. "Cash Constraints and Business Start-ups: Deutschmarks versus Dollars," Center for Policy Research Working Papers 11, Center for Policy Research, Maxwell School, Syracuse University.
  16. 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.
  17. 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.
  18. 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.
  19. 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.
  20. 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.
  21. 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.
  22. 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.
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.