CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 182Entrepreneurship Studies and InfluencesFirm Innovation and GrowthEconomic Theory and Institutions

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The rise of the entrepreneurial economy and the future of dynamic capitalism

Thurik, A.R., Stam, E., Audretsch, D.B.·2013·Technovation
DOI 10.1016/j.technovation.2013.07.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.technovation.2013.07.003

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In an entrepreneurial economy, overall performance does not depend on economies of scale but is more widely distributed among a variety of innovative firms and start-ups.

    “In an entrepreneurial economy, overall performance does not depend on economies of scale but is more widely distributed among a variety of innovative firms and start-­ ups ( Audretsch & Thurik, 2001 ; Thurik et al., 2013).”

    From Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program (2022) · cites this paper as Thurik et al., 2013

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 56

  1. Acs, 2006, How is entrepreneurship good for economic growth? Innovations: technology, governance, Globalization, 1, 97
  2. Acs, 2010, The missing link. Knowledge diffusion and entrepreneurship in endogenous growth, Small Business Economics, 34, 105, 10.1007/s11187-009-9235-1 · DOI
  3. Acs, 2009, The knowledge spillover theory of entrepreneurship, Small Business Economics, 32, 15, 10.1007/s11187-008-9157-3 · DOI
  4. Agarwal, 1992, Choice of foreign market entry mode: impact of ownership, location and internalization factors, Journal of International Business Studies, 23, 1, 10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490257 · DOI
  5. Audretsch, 2007, Entrepreneurship capital and economic growth, Oxford Review of Economic Policy, 23, 63, 10.1093/oxrep/grm001 · DOI
  6. Audretsch, 2001, Competition policy in dynamic markets, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 19, 613, 10.1016/S0167-7187(00)00086-2 · DOI
  7. Audretsch, 2000, Firm survival in the Netherlands, Review of Industrial Organization, 16, 1, 10.1023/A:1007824501527 · DOI
  8. Audretsch, 2005, Does the knowledge spillover theory hold for regions?, Research Policy, 34, 1191, 10.1016/j.respol.2005.03.012 · DOI
  9. Audretsch, 2000, Capitalism and democracy in the 21st century: from the managed to the entrepreneurial economy, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 10, 17, 10.1007/s001910050003 · DOI
  10. Audretsch, 2001, What is new about the new economy: sources of growth in the managed and entrepreneurial economies, Industrial and Corporate Change, 10, 267, 10.1093/icc/10.1.267 · DOI
  11. Blanchflower, 1998, What makes an entrepreneur?, Journal of Labor Economics, 16, 26, 10.1086/209881 · DOI
  12. Block, J., Thurik, A.R., Zhou, H., What turns inventions into innovative products? The role of entrepreneurship and knowledge spillovers. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, in press 10.1007/s00191-012-0265-5. · DOI
  13. Brock, 1989, Small business economics. Small Business Economics, 1, 7, 10.1007/BF00389913 · DOI
  14. Brown, 1989, The employer size-wage effect, Journal of Political Economy, 97, 1027, 10.1086/261642 · DOI
  15. Brynjolfsson, 2000, Beyond computation: information technology, organizational transformation and business performance, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 14, 23, 10.1257/jep.14.4.23 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Bryson, 1997, The creation and growth of small business service firms in post-industrial Britain, Small Business Economics, 9, 345, 10.1023/A:1007964520859 · DOI
  17. Crafts, 2004, Globalisation and economic growth: a historical perspective, The World Economy, 27, 45, 10.1111/j.1467-9701.2004.00587.x · DOI
  18. Dollar, 2004, Trade, growth, and poverty, Economic Journal, 114, F22, 10.1111/j.0013-0133.2004.00186.x · DOI
  19. Dougherty, 1995, The effects of organizational downsizing on product innovation, California Management Review, 37, 28, 10.2307/41165809 · DOI
  20. Griliches, 1979, Issues in assessing the contribution of R&D to productivity growth, Bell Journal of Economics, 10, 92, 10.2307/3003321 · DOI
  21. Henderson, 1990, Architectural innovation: the reconfiguration of existing product technologies and the failure of established firms, Administrative Science Quarterly, 35, 9, 10.2307/2393549 · DOI
  22. Jorgenson, 2001, Information technology and the U.S. economy, American Economic Review, 91, 1, 10.1257/aer.91.1.1 · DOI
  23. Jorgenson, 1999, Information technology and growth, American Economic Review, 89, 109, 10.1257/aer.89.2.109 · DOI
  24. Kassicieh, 2002, The role of small firms in the transfer of disruptive technologies, Technovation, 22, 667, 10.1016/S0166-4972(01)00064-5 · DOI
  25. Kedzie, 1997, Communication and Democracy: Coincident Revolutions and the Emergent Dictators, The F.S. Pardee RAND Graduate School Dissertation Series
  26. Kirchhoff, 1989, Creative destruction among industrial firms in the United States, Small Business Economics, 1, 161, 10.1007/BF00401854 · DOI
  27. Kirchhoff, 2007, The influence of university R&D expenditures on new business formations and employment growth, Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 31, 543, 10.1111/j.1540-6520.2007.00187.x · DOI
  28. Klepper, 1996, Entry, exit, growth, and innovation over the product life cycle, American Economic Review, 86, 562
  29. Klepper, 2010, Disagreements and intra-industry spinoffs, International Journal of Industrial Organization, 28, 526, 10.1016/j.ijindorg.2010.01.002 · DOI
  30. Lange, 2012, Job satisfaction and self-employment: autonomy or personality?, Small Business Economics, 38, 165, 10.1007/s11187-009-9249-8 · DOI
  31. Louca, 2002, Steady change: the 200 largest US manufacturing firms throughout the 20th century, Industrial and Corporate Change, 11, 817, 10.1093/icc/11.4.817 · DOI
  32. Lucas, 1988, On the mechanics of economic development, Journal of Monetary Economics, 22, 3, 10.1016/0304-3932(88)90168-7 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Mankiw, 1992, A contribution to the empirics of economic growth, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1072, 407, 10.2307/2118477 · DOI
  34. Mankiw, 2006, The politics and economics of offshore outsourcing, Journal of Monetary Economics, 53, 1056
  35. Millan, 2013, Determinants of job satisfaction across the EU-15: a comparison of self-employed and paid employees, Small Business Economics, 40, 651, 10.1007/s11187-011-9380-1 · DOI
  36. Mowery, 2009, Plus ca change: industrial R&D in the “third industrial revolution”, Industrial and Corporate Change, 18, 1, 10.1093/icc/dtn049 · DOI
  37. Nachum, 2005, The persistence of distance? The impact of technology on MNE investment motivations, Strategic Management Journal, 26, 747, 10.1002/smj.472 · DOI
  38. Nooteboom, 1993, Firm size effects on transaction costs, Small Business Economics, 5, 283, 10.1007/BF01516249 · DOI
  39. Nooteboom, 1994, Innovation and diffusion in small firms: theory and evidence, Small Business Economics, 6, 327, 10.1007/BF01065137 · DOI
  40. Parker, 1992, Price elasticity dynamics over the adoption life cycle, Journal of Marketing Research, 29, 358, 10.1177/002224379202900306 · DOI
  41. Penrose, 1992, Nationalisation of foreign-owned property for a public purpose: an economic perspective on appropriate compensation, Modern Law Review, 55, 351, 10.1111/j.1468-2230.1992.tb00916.x · DOI
  42. Robinson, 1995, Technology, change, and the emerging international order, SAIS Review, 15, 153
  43. Romer, 1990, Endogenous technical change, Journal of Political Economy, 98, S71, 10.1086/261725 · DOI · Paper page
  44. Romig, 2007, An introduction to nanotechnology policy: opportunities and constraints for emerging and established economies, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 74, 1634, 10.1016/j.techfore.2007.04.003 · DOI
  45. Samila, 2011, Noncompete covenants: incentives to innovate or impediments to growth, Management Science, 57, 425, 10.1287/mnsc.1100.1280 · DOI
  46. Shultz, 1985, Shaping American foreign policy: new realities and new ways of thinking, Foreign Affairs, 63, 705, 10.2307/20042281 · DOI
  47. Spencer, 2006, Schumpeter and new technology based firms: towards a framework for how NTBFs cause creative destruction, International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 2, 145, 10.1007/s11365-006-8681-3 · DOI
  48. Spencer, 2008, Entrepreneurship, innovation, and wealth distribution: the essence of creative destruction, International Small Business Journal, 26, 9, 10.1177/0266242607084657 · DOI
  49. Stam, E., Bosma, N., Van Witteloostuijn, A., De Jong, J., Bogaert, S., Edwards, N., Jaspers, F., 2012. Ambitious Entrepreneurship. A Review of the Academic Literature and New Directions for Public Policy. Advisory Council for Science and Technology Policy (AWT), The Hague.
  50. Thurik, 2008, Does self-employment reduce unemployment?, Journal of Business Venturing, 23, 673, 10.1016/j.jbusvent.2008.01.007 · DOI
  51. Uhlaner, 2007, Postmaterialism influencing total entrepreneurial activity across nations, Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 17, 161, 10.1007/s00191-006-0046-0 · DOI
  52. UNCTAD, 2004. World Investment Report 2004: The Shift towards Services. United Nation Conference on Trade and Development, New York and Geneva. Available from: 〈http:/www.unctad.org/wi〉.
  53. UNCTAD, 2007. World Investment Report 2007: Transnational Corporations, Extractive Industries and Development. United Nation Conference on Trade and Development, New York and Geneva. Available from: 〈http:/www.unctad.org/wir〉.
  54. Varian, 2011, Micromultinationals will run the world, Foreign Policy, 188
  55. Wennekers, 2010, The relationship between entrepreneurship and economic development: is it U-shaped?, Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship, 6, 167, 10.1561/0300000023 · DOI
  56. Wennekers, 2005, Nascent entrepreneurship and the level of economic development, Small Business Economics, 24, 293, 10.1007/s11187-005-1994-8 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

  • Toward an Entrepreneurial Ecosystem Research Program

    Wurth, B., Stam, E., & Spigel, B. (2022) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1177/1042258721998948 · Cited by 789

    “In an entrepreneurial economy, overall performance does not depend on economies of scale but is more widely distributed among a variety of innovative firms and start-ups ( Audretsch & Thurik, 2001 ; Thurik et al., 2013).”
    InfluentialSelf-citation

Metadata

Authors
Thurik, A. R., Stam, E., & Audretsch, D. B.
Affiliations
  • Utrecht University (NL)
  • Indiana University (US)
Corresponding author
Stam, E.
ORCID
Venue
Technovation
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2013-08
Volume
33
Issue
8-9
Pages
302-310
ISSN
0166-4972 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.technovation.2013.07.003
OpenAlex
W2005504753
Cited by
182
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 10 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1
FWCI
21.76
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Technovation (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (publishedVersion)
  • EUR Research Repository (Erasmus University Rotterdam) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Business, Management and Accounting › Management of Technology and Innovation › Entrepreneurship Studies and Influences
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Firm Innovation and Growth
  • Social Sciences › Economics, Econometrics and Finance › Economics and Econometrics › Economic Theory and Institutions
Keywords
entrepreneurial economy, managed economy, technological change, entrepreneurship policy, post-communist transition, globalization, corporate restructuring, knowledge production, economic prosperity, public policy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review