The DOI matches its Crossref record; 53 of the 53 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Informal entrepreneurship and institutional theory: explaining the varying degrees of (in)formalization of entrepreneurs in Pakistan
Open accessAbstract
In recent years, scholars adopting institutional theory have explained the tendency of entrepreneurs to operate in the informal sector to be a result of the asymmetry between formal institutions (the codified laws and regulations) and informal institutions (norms, values and codes of conduct). The aim of this article is to further advance this institutional approach by evaluating the varying degrees of informalization of entrepreneurs and then analysing whether lower levels of formalization are associated with higher levels of institutional asymmetry. To do this, a 2012 survey of the varying degrees of informalization of 300 entrepreneurs in Pakistan is reported. The finding is that 62% of entrepreneurs operate wholly informal enterprises, 31% largely informal and 7% largely formal enterprises. None operate wholly formal enterprises. Those displaying lower levels of formalization are shown to be significantly more likely to display higher levels of institutional asymmetry, exhibiting greater concerns about public sector corruption, possessing lower tax morality and being more concerned about high tax rates and the procedural and distributive injustice and unfairness of the authorities. These entrepreneurs tend to be lower-income, younger and less-educated entrepreneurs. The article concludes by discussing the theoretical and policy implications of these findings.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance
North, D. C. (1990) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511808678 · Cited by 32,691
Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance
Munger, M. C., & North, D. C. (1991) · Southern Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/1060065 · Cited by 24,871
(2000) · Cited by 5,104
Income tax evasion: a theoretical analysis
Allingham, M. G., & Sandmo, A. (1972) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/0047-2727(72)90010-2 · Cited by 4,970
Institutions, Institutional Change and Economic Performance.
Schout, A., & North, D. C. (1991) · The Economic Journal · doi:10.2307/2234910 · Cited by 4,775
Informal Institutions and Comparative Politics: A Research Agenda
Helmke, G., & Levitsky, S. (2004) · Perspectives on Politics · doi:10.1017/s1537592704040472 · Cited by 3,175
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor
Brown, W., Galloway, L., & Levie, J. (2002) · Cited by 2,931
Contextualizing Entrepreneurship—Conceptual Challenges and Ways Forward
Welter, F. (2011) · Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice · doi:10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00427.x · Cited by 2,703
Dodging the grabbing hand: the determinants of unofficial activity in 69 countries
Friedman, E., Johnson, S., Kaufmann, D., & Zoido-Lobaton, P. (2000) · Journal of Public Economics · doi:10.1016/s0047-2727(99)00093-6 · Cited by 1,559
The Economic Psychology of Tax Behaviour
Kirchler, E., & Braithwaite, V. (2007) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511628238 · Cited by 1,206
Metadata
- Authors
- Williams, C. C., & Shahid, M. S.
- Venue
- Entrepreneurship & Regional Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2014-10-08
- Volume
- 28
- Issue
- 1-2
- Pages
- 1-25
- ISSN
- 0898-5626 (ISSN-L)
- 1464-5114
- OpenAlex
- W2070338899
- Cited by
- 301
- References
- 53
- FWCI
- 38.52
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Informal entrepreneurship and institutional theory: explaining the varying degrees of (in)formalization of entrepreneurs in Pakistan. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/08985626.2014.963889
- The paper
- Williams, C. C., & Shahid, M. S. (2016). Informal entrepreneurship and institutional theory: explaining the varying degrees of (in)formalization of entrepreneurs in Pakistan. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2014.963889
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.