IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/wiw/wiwrsa/ersa14p704.html

The Key Areas Turkey Needs to Work on Due to Improve Entrepreneurship

Author

Listed:
  • Senay Oguztimur

Abstract

Even though Turkey is frequently regarded as an emerging market and actually has many advantages to be considered as an attractive place to invest and do business, it is not that much attractive for international economy world. Despite Turkey's capacity, such as being 16th largest market with its young population as well as approximately 8% gross domestic product increase, varied industry base with a wide talent pool, according to various international independent research institutes, the global market does not view Turkey as a beneficial place for entrepreneurship. Moreover there are quite a large number of barriers to attract investment and to make successful investment and entrepreneurship opportunities in Turkey. Besides the entrepreneurship indicators in Turkey demonstrate similar point. One of the most conspicuous is that just about six tenth of Turkish people regard their local environment to be a good one for fostering entrepreneurs and entrepreneurship. The very little number of female entrepreneurs (while compared with the man-dominant market) is also a barrier to Turkey becoming a positive and inclusive environment for continued entrepreneurial growth. With consideration paid to given statistics in recent years, Turkey generally remains in the last quarter while compared with the overall countries having possibility to attract entrepreneurs. After analyzing the present circumstances, this paper focuses on the national and local level of obstacles of entrepreneurship in Turkey. Within the light of the researches of statistics and secondary documents; it is obvious that Turkey should take into account such the following issues: chaos in Turkish bureaucracy, counterworks in protecting intellectual property and drawbacks to break monopolies in the marketplace are the first significant points to worth stressing. To support entrepreneurship, reforms and regulations need to be done in order to create an inviting and successful atmosphere for potential entrepreneurs even from local level and from international market. In order to deal with the problems of enlargement the capacity of Turkish entrepreneurship, commitment to fostering a positive environment for entrepreneurship should have done over and above launching a series of programs designed to foster growth and support entrepreneurship. The main purpose of this paper is to evaluate the key points that Turkey needs to work on due to improve entrepreneurship.

Suggested Citation

  • Senay Oguztimur, 2014. "The Key Areas Turkey Needs to Work on Due to Improve Entrepreneurship," ERSA conference papers ersa14p704, European Regional Science Association.
    • Handle: RePEc:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p704
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www-sre.wu.ac.at/ersa/ersaconfs/ersa14/e140826aFinal00704.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nicolai J. Foss & Peter G. Klein (ed.), 2002. "Entrepreneurship and the Firm," Books, Edward Elgar Publishing, number 2377, June.
    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. Yasemin Eroglu & Lubna Rashid, 2022. "The Impact of Perceived Support and Barriers on the Sustainable Orientation of Turkish Startups," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, April.

    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. Magnus Henrekson & Mikael Stenkula, 2017. "The entrepreneurial rent: the value of and compensation for entrepreneurship," Journal of Entrepreneurship and Public Policy, Emerald Group Publishing Limited, vol. 6(1), pages 11-25, April.
    2. Langlois Richard N., 2002. "Kirznerian Entrepreneurship and The Nature of The Firm," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-11, March.
    3. Sylvia Maxfield, 2008. "Reconciling Corporate Citizenship and Competitive Strategy: Insights from Economic Theory," Journal of Business Ethics, Springer, vol. 80(2), pages 367-377, June.
    4. Djula Borozan & Josip Arneric & Ilija Coric, 2017. "A comparative study of net entrepreneurial productivity in developed and post-transition economies," International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 855-880, September.
    5. repec:ejw:journl:v:12:y:2015:i:3:p:400-431 is not listed on IDEAS
    6. Kirsten Foss & Nicolai J. Foss, 2003. "Authority in the Context of Distributed Knowledge," DRUID Working Papers 03-08, DRUID, Copenhagen Business School, Department of Industrial Economics and Strategy/Aalborg University, Department of Business Studies.
    7. repec:jpe:journl:1124 is not listed on IDEAS
    8. Les Oxley & Paul Walker & David Thorns & Hong Wang, 2008. "The knowledge economy/society: the latest example of “Measurement without theory”?," The Journal of Philosophical Economics, Bucharest Academy of Economic Studies, The Journal of Philosophical Economics, vol. 2(1), pages 20-54, November.
    9. Jacques-Laurent Ravix, 2008. "Nature and governance of the firm: in search of an integrated perspective," International Review of Applied Economics, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 22(4), pages 463-478.
    10. Zoltan J. Acs & Pontus Braunerhjelm, 2008. "The Entrepreneurship-Philanthropy Nexus: Implication for Internationalization," Chapters, in: Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy, chapter 35, pages 525-558, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Nicolai Foss, 2002. "'Coase vs Hayek': Economic Organization and the Knowledge Economy," International Journal of the Economics of Business, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 9(1), pages 9-35.
    12. Saras D. Sarasvathy & Nicholas Dew, 2013. "Without judgment: An empirically-based entrepreneurial theory of the firm," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 26(3), pages 277-296, September.
    13. Steven E. Phelan, 2016. "Austrian theories of entrepreneurship: Insights from complexity theory," The Review of Austrian Economics, Springer;Society for the Development of Austrian Economics, vol. 29(3), pages 277-297, September.
    14. Leonid Krasnozhon, 2011. "Property rights and farm efficiency: evidence from Ukraine," Economic Change and Restructuring, Springer, vol. 44(4), pages 279-295, November.
    15. Peter Nijkamp, 2009. "Entrepreneurship, Development, and the Spatial Context: Retrospect and Prospect," WIDER Working Paper Series RP2009-08, World Institute for Development Economic Research (UNU-WIDER).
    16. Hinnerich, Björn Tyrefors & Vlachos, Jonas, 2017. "The impact of upper-secondary voucher school attendance on student achievement. Swedish evidence using external and internal evaluations," Labour Economics, Elsevier, vol. 47(C), pages 1-14.
    17. Zoltan J. Acs & David Audretsch & Ronnie J. Phillips & Sameeksha Desai, 2007. "The Entrepreneurship-Philanthropy Nexus: Nonmarket Source of American Entrepreneurial Capitalism," Papers on Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy 2007-09, Max Planck Institute of Economics, Entrepreneurship, Growth and Public Policy Group.
    18. Ioannides Stavros, 2002. "Owners, Managers, and Entrepreneurship in The Corporate Firm," Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines, De Gruyter, vol. 12(1), pages 1-14, March.
    19. Henrekson, Magnus, 2007. "Entrepreneurship and Institutions," Working Paper Series 707, Research Institute of Industrial Economics.
    20. Jackie Krafft & Jacques-Laurent Ravix, 2005. "The governance of innovative firms: an evolutionary approach," Post-Print hal-00203620, HAL.
    21. Lee, Jaeho & Slater, Jim, 2007. "Dynamic capabilities, entrepreneurial rent-seeking and the investment development path: The case of Samsung," Journal of International Management, Elsevier, vol. 13(3), pages 241-257, September.
    22. Bögenhold, Dieter & Klinglmair, Andrea, 2016. "Organizations, Occupations and Decentral Work: On Hybridity and Ambiguity of Own-Account Workers," MPRA Paper 76860, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • L26 - Industrial Organization - - Firm Objectives, Organization, and Behavior - - - Entrepreneurship

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:wiw:wiwrsa:ersa14p704. 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: Gunther Maier (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.ersa.org .

    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.