SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Bogazici Journal: Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies / 2009 / Sayı: 23

Türkiye'de girişimcilik faaliyetleri: GEM verisi kullanarak uluslararası bir karşılaştırma

Entrepreneurial activities in Turkey: An International comparison using GEM data

Esra KARADENİZ
Özlem YILMAZ ÖZDEMİR
Pages
19–36
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

The results indicate a low participation rate of women and young individuals in the entrepreneurial activities and a low level of entrepreneurial dynamism in the Turkish economy.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of this study is to explore the entrepreneurial activities in Turkey and to determine Turkey's entrepreneurial position globally.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The results indicate a low participation rate of women and young individuals in the entrepreneurial activities and a low level of entrepreneurial dynamism in the Turkish economy.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Furthermore, lack of financial support, inadequate government policies providing knowledge about technology and tax incentives, and insufficient intellectual property rights are found to be some of the important obstacles encountered by entrepreneurs in Turkey compared to those in some developing and developed countries.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of this study is to explore the entrepreneurial activities in Turkey and to determine Turkey's entrepreneurial position globally. Data is collected through the standard survey of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) project. The results indicate a low participation rate of women and young individuals in the entrepreneurial activities and a low level of entrepreneurial dynamism in the Turkish economy. Furthermore, lack of financial support, inadequate government policies providing knowledge about technology and tax incentives, and insufficient intellectual property rights are found to be some of the important obstacles encountered by entrepreneurs in Turkey compared to those in some developing and developed countries.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı Türkiye'deki girişimcilik faaliyetlerini açıklamak ve Türkiye'nin girişimcilik bakımından uluslararası yerini belirlemektir. Veriler, Global Girişimcilik İzleme (GEM) projesinde kullanılan standart anket aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Sonuçlar, Türkiye ekonomisinde kadınların ve gençlerin girişimcilik faaliyetlerine katılım oranlarının ve girişimciliğin dinamizm seviyesinin düşük olduğunu göstermektedir. Bunun yanında, bazı gelişmekte ve gelişmiş ülkelerle kıyaslandığında, Türkiye 'deki girişimcilerin finansal destek yokluğu, teknoloji ve vergi destekleri konusunda bilgi veren uygun devlet politikalarının olmayışı ve eksik fikri mülkiyet haklarının varlığı gibi sorunlarla karşılaştığı ortaya çıkmaktadır.

🔖

Cite This Article

KARADENİZ, E., ÖZDEMİR, Ö. Y. (2009). Türkiye'de girişimcilik faaliyetleri: GEM verisi kullanarak uluslararası bir karşılaştırma. Bogazici Journal: Review of Social, Economic and Administrative Studies, Sayı: 23, 19–36. https://ajindex.com/articles/146299

References (15)

  1. Acs, Z.J. and Audretsch D.B. (1993). Small Business andEntrepreneurship: An East-West Perspective, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  2. Ahuja, G., and Lampert C.M. (2001). "Entrepreneurship in the Large Corporation: A Longitudinal Study of How Established Firms Create Breakthrough Inventions," Strategic Management Journal, 22(6/7): 521-543.
  3. Allen, I.E., Langowitz, N., and Minniti, M. (2007). "Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2006."
  4. Report on Women and Entrepreneurship, The Centre for Women's Leadership, Babson Park, M.A.: Babson College and London, U.K.: London Business School. Alpkan, L., Yilmaz, C., and Kaya, N. (2007). "Market Orientation and Planning Flexibility in SMEs: Performance Implications and an Empirical Investigation," International Small Business Journal, 25(2): 152-172.
  5. Arenius, P., and Minniti, M. (2005). "Perceptual Variables and Nascent Entrepreneurship," Small Business Economics, 24: 233-247.
  6. Begley, T.M., Tan, W.L., and Schoch, H. (2005). "Politico-Economic Factors Associated with Interest in Starting a Business: A Multi-Country Study," Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 29(1): 35-55.
  7. Bosma, N. and Harding, R. (2007). "Global Entrepreneurship: GEM 2006
  8. Summary Results." Babson Park, M.A.: Babson College and London, U.K.: London Business School. Bullvaag, E., Acs, Z.J., Allen, I.E., Bygrave, W.D., and Spinelli, S. Jr. (2006). "GEM-United States 2004-2005."
  9. Executive Report, Babson Park, M.A.: Babson College and London, U.K.: London Business School. Chow, I.H. (2006). "The Relationship between Entrepreneurial Orientation and Firm Performance in The People's Republic of China," Advanced Management Journal, 71(3): 11-20.
  10. Davidsson P. and Magnus, H. (2002). "Determinants of the Prevalence of Start-ups and High-Growth Firms," Small Business Economics, 19(2): 81-104.
  11. Demirbaş, D. (2006). "New Institutional Economy and Innovation Barriers: Micro Econometric Evidence," The Business Review, 5: 82-88.
  12. Drnovsek, M. (2004). "Job Creation Process in a Transition Economy," Small Business Economics, 23: 179-188.
  13. Freytag, A. and Thurik R (2007). "Entrepreneurship and Its Determinants in a Cross-Country Setting," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 17(2): 117-131.
  14. Gardner, D.M. (1994). "Marketing-Entrepreneurship Interface: A Conceptualisation," in G.E. Hills (ed.), Marketing and Entrepreneurship: Research Ideas and Opportunities: 35-54.
  15. Westport, CT: Quorum Books. Grant, R.M., Jamine, A.P., and Thomas, H. (1988). "Diversity, Diversification, and Pro