Analyse comparative des facteurs d'innovation entrepreneuriale dans 25 États nationaux
DOI :
https://doi.org/10.12795/anduli.2022.i21.03Mots-clés :
entrepreneuriat, innovation en entreprise, Analyse en Composantes Principales, comparaison internationale, Global Entrepreneurship IndexRésumé
À la base de l'esprit d'entreprise se trouve le défi que les personnes dotées de compétences entrepreneuriales (entrepreneurs) doivent relever dès le départ dans un environnement de plus en plus dynamique dominé par l'incertitude. L'innovation et le processus d'innovation doivent être constants dans les actions entrepreneuriales. Partant de cette hypothèse, on ne peut ignorer le caractère essentiel de la capacité d'adaptation de l'entrepreneur aux exigences et aux demandes du marché. La prise de risques et l'incertitude génèrent évidemment une motivation au niveau individuel chez les entrepreneurs-acteurs. L'action dans un environnement dynamique conduit à la nécessité urgente d'adopter de nouvelles technologies dans les affaires. Du point de vue de la mise en œuvre et de l'utilisation de l'innovation, cette étude utilise des méthodes quantitatives pour illustrer les défis liés à l'innovation dans l'environnement des entreprises. Notre échantillon comprend 25 États nationaux, sélectionnés en fonction de leur rang dans l'indice mondial de l'entrepreneuriat. En prenant comme point de départ l'influence exercée par l'innovation et le processus d'innovation au sein des entreprises, nous identifions certains éléments qui justifient le niveau de développement de l'entrepreneuriat. En utilisant l'analyse en composantes principales, nous confirmons que l'innovation, sous ses différentes formes (processus, produit, etc.), peut affecter de manière significative les écarts entre les pays. Les trois axes factoriels résultant de l'analyse des principales composantes (concurrence, innovation de produit et innovation de procédé) expliquent le positionnement des États de part et d'autre de la hiérarchie internationale.
Téléchargements
Références
Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B. (1987). Innovation, market structure, and firm size. Review of Economics and Statistics, 69(4), 567–574.
Acs, Z. J., Audretsch, D. B. (1988). Innovation in large and small firms: An empirical analysis. American Economic Review, 78(4), 678–690.
Acs, Z., Szerb, L., Lloyd, A. (2018). The Global Entrepreneurship Index. Washington: The Global Entrepreneurship and Development Institute.
Acs, Z., Szerb, L., Lloyd, A. (2018). The Global Entrepreneurship Index. Technical Annex. Washington: The Global Entrepreneurship and Development Institute.
Amit, R., Zott, C. (2013). Business Model Innovation: Creating Value In Times Of Change. MIT Sloan Management Review, 53(3), 41-49.
ANNA. (2016, August 31). London to New York market stable at just over four million annual pax. Retrieved from Airline Network News and Analysis: https://www.anna.aero/2016/08/31/london-to-new-york-market-analysed/
Avanzini, D. (2009). Designing composite entrepreneurship indicators: An application using consensus PCA. WIDER Research Paper, No. 2009/41, ISBN 978-92-9230-212-2, The United Nations University World Institute for Development Economics Research (UNU-WIDER), Helsinki.
Baumol, W. (2002). The Free-Market Innovation Machine: Analyzing The Growth Miracle Of Capitalism. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Baumol, W. J. (1968). Entrepreneurship in Economic Theory. American Economic Review, 58(2), 64-71.
Bhide, A. (2000). The Origin and Evolution of New Businesses. New York: Oxford University Press.
Böhm-Bawerk, E. (1930 [1889]). The Positive Theory of Capital. New York: G.E. Stechert & Co.
Böhm-Bawerk, E. (1959 [1884]). History and Critique of Interest Theories. South Holland: Libertarian Press - Translated by George D. Huncke and Hans F. Sennholz.
Böhm-Bawerk, E. (1962 [1881]). Whether Legal Rights and Relationships Are Economic Goods. In E. Böhm-Bawerk, Shorter Classics of Böhm-Bawerk: Volume I . (pp. 30 -138). South Holland: Libertarian Press.
Bosma, N. (2013). The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and Its Impact on Entrepreneurship Research. Foundations and Trends in Entrepreneurship 9 (2), 143–248.
Brem, A., Voigt, K. . (2007). Innovation Management in Emerging Technology Ventures – The Concept of an Integrated Idea Management. International Journal of Technology Policy and Management, 7(3), 304-321.
Brooke, G. (2010). Uncertainty, Profit and Entrepreneurial Action: Frank Knight's Contribution Reconsidered. Journal of History of Economic Thought, vol. 32(2), 221-235.
Cantillon, R. (1755). Essai sur la nature du commerce en général. Paris: Institut Coopet.
Chell, E. (2008). The Nascent Entrepreneur, Business Development and the Role of Human Resources. In R. &. Barret, International Handbook of Entrepreneurship and HRM (pp. 21-46). Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.
Cliff, J.E., Jennings, D. J, Greenwood, R. (2006). New to the Game and Questioning the Rules: The Experiences and Beliefs of Founders Who Start Imitative versus Innovative Firms. Journal of Business Venturing 21 (5), 633-663.
Covin, J.G., Slevin, D.P. (1986). The Development and Testing of an Organizational-Level Entrepreneurship Scale. In R. H. Ronstadt, Frontiers of entrepreneurship research (pp. 628-639). Wellesley, MA: Babs.
Damanpour, F. (1991). Organizational innovation: a meta-analysis of effects of determinants and moderators. Academy of Management Journal, 5 (34) , 555-590.
Drucker, P. (1985). Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Oxford : Butterworth Heinemann.
Eker, A. (91-102). Intellectual Property and R&D Investment as Measures of Innovation in Switzerland, the USA, and Singapore. International Journal of Arts & Sciences Vol. 9 (03), 2016.
Estrin, S., Mickiewicz, T. (2010). Entrepreneurship in Transition Economies. The Role of Institutions and Generational Change. IZA Discussion Paper No. 4805 .
Eurocontrol. (2018). European Aviation in 2040. Challenges of Growth. Bruxelles: Eurocontrol.
Fetter, F. (1928 [1915]). Economic Principles. New York: The Century Co.
Foss, N.; Klein, P. J. (2012). Organizing Entrepreneurial Judgment a New Approach of the Firm. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Galindo, M.A., Mendez-Picazo, M.T. (2013). Innovation, entrepreneurship and economic growth. Management Decision, 51(3), 501-514.
Golubetskaya, N., Koshelev, T. Kunin, V. (2017). Problems of innovative development of an entrepreneurship in the industry in the conditions of upgrade of Economy. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science (90), 1-10.
Gordon, R. (2018). Why has economic growth sloewd when innovation appears to bo accelereating? Cambridge: National Bureau of Economic Research.
Hawley, F. (1907). Enterprise and the productive process: a theory of economic productivity. New York, London: G.P. Putnam's sons.
Hayek, F. ( 1975 [1939]). Profits, Interest and Investment and others Essays on the Theory of Industrial Fluctuations. Clifton: Augustus M. Kelly Publishers.
Hayek, F. (1988). The Fatal Conceit: The Errors of Socialism. Londra: Routledge.
Hayek, F. (2014). Utilizarea cunoașterii în societate. In Individualism și ordine economică (pp. 81-93). Iași: Editura Universității Alexandru Ioan Cuza, Iași.
Hayek, F. A. (1960). The Constitution of Liberty. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
Henrekson, M., Sanandaji, T. . (2019). Measuring Entrepreneurship: Do Established Metrics Capture Schumpeterian Entrepreneurship? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 1-28.
Horwitz, S. (2019). Ludwig Lachmann as a Theorist of Entrepreneurship. Studies in Logic, Grammar and Rethoric, vol 57(70), 19-40.
Jorgenson, D. W. (2011). Innovation and productivity growth. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 93(2), 276-296.
Jorgenson, D. W. (2011). Innovation and productivity growth. American Journal of Agricultural Economics, 93(2), 276-296.
Kanter, R. (1988). When a thousand flowers bloom: structural, collective and social conditions for innovation in organizations. Research in Organizational Behaviour (10), 169-211.
Kirzner, I. (1973). Competition and Entrepreneurship. Chicago, Londra: The University of Chicago Press.
Kirzner, I. (1985). Discovery and the Capitalist Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press .
Klein, P. (2010). The Capitalist & The Entrepreneur. Essay on Organizations & Markets. Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Knight, F. (1921). Risk, Uncertainty and Profit. New York: Augustus M. Kelly Bookseller.
Knight, F. (1942). Profit and Entrepreneurial Functions . The Journal of Economic History, Vol. 2, Supplement: The Tasks of Economic History, 126-132.
Kortum, S., & Lerner, J. (2000). Assessing the Contribution of Venture Capital to Innovation. The RAND Journal of Economics, 31(4), 674-692.
Kortum, S., Lerner, J. ( 2000). Assessing the Contribution of Venture Capital to Innovation. The RAND Journal of Economics, 31(4), 674-692.
Langlois, R. N. (2005). The Entrepreneurial Theory of the Firm and the Theory of the Entrepreneurial Firm. University of Connecticut.
Lassen, A.H., Gertsen, F., Riis, J.E. (2006). The Nexus of Corporate Entrepreneurship and Radical Innovation. Journal Compilation, 15(4), 359–372.
Marshall, A. (1875). The Pure Theory of Foreign Trade - The Pure Theory of Domestic Value. London: London School of Economics and Polical Sciences.
McCaffrey, M., Salerno, J.T. (2014). Böhm-Bawerk's Approach to Entrepreneurship. Journal of the History of Economic Thought (36), 435-454.
Mill, J. (1848). Principles of Political Economy with some of their Applications to Social Philosophy. London: Longmans, Green and Co., http://www.econlib.org/library/Mill/mlP1.html.
Mises, L. (2018 [1949]). Acțiunea Umană. București: Editura Institutului Ludwig von Mises România, Traducere: Dan Cristian Comănescu.
Mises, L. (2018 [1951]). Profit and Loss. Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Papula, J., Kohnova, L., Papulova, Z. (2018). Impact of national culture on innovation activities of companies: a case of Germany, Austria, Switzerland and the Czech Republic. Economic Annals-ХХI,Volume 169 (1), 26-30.
Qian, H., Acs, Z.J. . (2013). An absorptive capacity theory of knowledge spillover entrepreneurship. . Small Business Economics (40) , 185–197 .
Rothbard, M. (2001). Man, Economy and State. Alabama: Ludwig von Mises Institute.
Say, J. (1821). A Treatise on Political Economy or The Production, Distribution and Consumption of Wealth. New York: Augustus M. Kelley Publishers, https://mises.org/sites/default/files/A%20Treatise%20on%20Political%20Economy_5.pdf.
Schoemaker, P.J.H., Heaton, S., Teece, D. (2018). Innovation, Dynamic Capabilities, and Leadership. California Management Review, 1-28.
Schumpeter, J. (1939). Business Cycles: A Theoretical, Historical, and Statistic Analysis of the Capitalist Process. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Company.
Schumpeter, J. (1942). Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy. New York: Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2003.
Stayton, J., Mangematin, V. (2016). Startup time, innovation and organizational emergence: A study of USA-based international technology ventures. Journal of International Entrepreneurship, Vol. 14, 373-409.
Taneja, N. (2002). Driving Airline Business Strategies through Emerging Technology. Burlington: Ashgate Publishing Company .
Wan, D., Huat Ong, C., Lee, F. (2005). Determinants of firm innovation in Singapore. Technovation, Volume 25 (3), 261-268.
Wang, J. (2018). Innovation and government intervention: A comparison of Singapore and Hong Kong. Research Policy, vol. 42(7), 399-412.
Yam, R.C.M., Lo, W., Tang, E.P.Y., Lau, A.K.W. (2011). Analysis of sources of innovation, technological innovation capabilities, and performance: an empirical study of Hong Kong manufacturing industries. Research Policy, 40 (3), 391-402.
Young, A. (1992). A tale of two cities: factor accumulation and technical change in Hong Kong and Singapore. NBER Macroecon. Annu., 7, 13-51.
Zott, C., Amit, R. (2007). Business Model Design and the Performance of Entrepreneurial Firms. Organization Science, 18 (2), 181-199.
Téléchargements
Publié-e
Comment citer
Numéro
Rubrique
Licence
© ANDULI, Journal des Sciences Sociales 2021
Cette œuvre est sous licence Creative Commons Attribution - Pas d'Utilisation Commerciale - Partage dans les Mêmes Conditions 4.0 International.
Las ediciones impresa y electrónica de esta Revista son editadas por el Editorial Universidad de Sevilla, siendo necesario citar la procedencia en cualquier reproducción parcial o total.
Salvo indicación contraria, todos los contenidos de la edición electrónica se distribuyen bajo una licencia de uso y distribución “Creative Commons Atribución-NoComercial-SinDerivar 4.0 Internacional” 
Puede consultar desde aquí la versión informativa y el texto legal de la licencia. Esta circunstancia ha de hacerse constar expresamente de esta forma cuando sea necesario.
Los autores/as que publiquen en esta revista aceptan las siguientes condiciones:
- Los autores/as conservan los derechos de autor y ceden a la revista el derecho de la primera publicación, con el trabajo registrado con la licencia de atribución de Creative Commons, que permite a terceros utilizar lo publicado siempre que mencionen la autoría del trabajo y a la primera publicación en esta revista.
- Los autores/as pueden realizar otros acuerdos contractuales independientes y adicionales para la distribución no exclusiva de la versión del artículo publicado en esta revista (p. ej., incluirlo en un repositorio institucional o publicarlo en un libro) siempre que indiquen claramente que el trabajo se publicó por primera vez en esta revista.
- Se permite y recomienda a los autores/as a publicar su trabajo en Internet (por ejemplo en páginas institucionales o personales) antes y durante el proceso de revisión y publicación, ya que puede conducir a intercambios productivos y a una mayor y más rápida difusión del trabajo publicado (vea The Effect of Open Access).
