Skip to main navigation menu Skip to main content Skip to site footer

Vol. 7 No. 4 (2021)
December 2021

Articles

Entrepreneurial activity in Turkey: A statistical overview for the years of 2006-2020

https://doi.org/10.15678/IER.2021.0704.02

Published 2021-12-01

  • Mustafa Toycan
    • ,
  • Burak Erkut

Mustafa Toycan
Bahçeşehir Kıbrıs Üniversitesi

Burak Erkut
Bahçeşehir Cyprus University

Abstract

Objective: The objective of the article is to understand the development of Turkish entrepreneurial activity over the last 15 years.

Research Design & Methods: The research design employed in this article is a quantitative one, mainly by utilizing the data available from Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and Eurostat to map the structure and the development of Turkish entrepreneurial activity between 2006 and 2020. With respect to gender, age and education status of Turkish self-employed, the article also employs a chi-square test of association.

Findings: The main empirical results of this article identify that whereas the overall share of self-employed among the active Turkish population dropped from 24% in 2006 to 17% in 2020, this is not only above the EU-27 average, but also largely due to a drop in the share of own account workers. The article highlights that over the duration of 15 years, the share of job creators among the active Turkish population remained stable despite all the negative events occurred in Turkey. The article also identifies a gender imbalance in terms of self-employment, and a significant difference between educational background of own account workers and job creators.

Implications & Recommendations: Understanding the patterns of development of Turkish entrepreneurial economic activity in the last 15 years can serve as a point of departure for both entrepreneurship researchers and policymakers. For entrepreneurship researchers, the case not only allows for a cross-national comparison, but also delivers empirical evidence from a transition country. For policymakers, fluctuations in the number of own account workers deserve more attention whereas stability of job creators can be further analysed for understanding what makes this group particularly stable despite all the negative events that occurred over the last decade.

Contribution & Value Added: The study contributes to the literature by offering a current overview of Turkish entrepreneurial activity in the last 15 years. Since the literature on Turkish entrepreneurship is primarily dominated by topics such as students’ entrepreneurial intentions, women entrepreneurship or migrant entrepreneurship, the study offers empirical evidence to see the bigger picture of Turkish entrepreneurial economic activity.

Keywords

Entrepreneurial activity, self-employment, Turkey

(PDF) Save

Author Biography

Mustafa Toycan

Mustafa Toycan is the secretary general of Bahçeşehir Cyprus University. His research interests include entrepreneurship, fintech and blockchain economics.

Burak Erkut

PhD in product innovation and market shaping from the perspective of evolutionary economics, 2018, TU Dresden, Germany) is a full-time member of the Faculty of Economics, Administrative, and Social Sciences of Bahçeşehir Cyprus University as well as a fellow of Institute for Research in Economic and Fiscal Issues (IREF). His research interests include evolutionary economics, innovation, and entrepreneurship.

References

  1. Aktürk, O. (2021). Osmanlı’dan Cumhuriyete Ahilik, Küçük Esnaf ve Girişimcilik Kültürü. In H. Y. Taş, M. Küçükoğlu, & M. Demirdöğmez (Eds.), Girişimcilik ve KOBİ Araştırmaları (pp. 29-55).
  2. Akyar, D., & Sarıkaya, R. (2020). Content Analysis of Graduate Theses on the Concept of Entrepreneurship in The Field of Education in Turkey. Gazi Üniversitesi Gazi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 40(3), 979-1018.
  3. Ármane, S., Gärtig, S. İ., Gärtig, R., Tegtmeier, S., & Brem, A. (2021). STEM educated women entrepreneurs in Denmark, Latvia and Turkey: a context-based explorative study. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Venturing, 13(2), 186. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEV.2021.114409
  4. Baktır, Z., & Watson, F. (2021). Trust-Driven Entrepreneurship for Community Well-Being of Refugees and Their Local Hosts. Journal of Macromarketing, 41(2), 251-266. https://doi.org/10.1177/0276146720935157
  5. Baluku, M. M., Onderi, P., & Otto, K. (2021). Predicting self-employment intentions and entry in Germany and East Africa: an investigation of the impact of mentoring, entrepreneurial attitudes, and psychological capital. Journal of Small Business & Entrepreneurship, 33(3), 289-322. https://doi.org/10.1080/08276331.2019.1666337
  6. Benazzouz, N. M. (2019). Entrepreneurial orientation and innovation intensity: A synthetic literature review. International Entrepreneurship Review, 5(2), 23-36. https://doi.org/10.15678/IER.2019.0502.02
  7. Birelma, A. (2019). Working-class entrepreneurialism: Perceptions, aspirations, and experiences of petty entrepreneurship among male manual workers in Turkey. New Perspectives on Turkey, 61, 45-70. https://doi.org/10.1017/npt.2019.18
  8. Bozoğlu Batı, G., & Armutlulu, İ. H. (2020). Work and family conflict analysis of female entrepreneurs in Turkey and classification with rough set theory. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 7(1), 15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-020-0498-0
  9. Buenstorf, G. (2007). Creation and Pursuit of Entrepreneurial Opportunities: An Evolutionary Economics Perspective. Small Business Economics, 28(4), 323-337. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-006-9039-5
  10. Çetindamar, D., Gupta, V. K., Karadeniz, E. E., & Eğrican, N. (2012). What the numbers tell: The impact of human, family and financial capital on women and men’s entry into entrepreneurship in Turkey. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 24(1-2), 29-51. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985626.2012.637348
  11. Chang, C. (2021). The economically rich refugees: A case study of the business operations of Istanbul‐based Syrian refugee businesspeople. International Migration, imig.12886. https://doi.org/10.1111/imig.12886
  12. Davidsson, P. (2015). Data replication and extension: A commentary. Journal of Business Venturing Insights, 3, 12-15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbvi.2015.02.001
  13. Dvouletý, O. (2019). Development of Entrepreneurial Activity in the Czech Republic over the Years 2005–2017. Journal of Open Innovation: Technology, Market, and Complexity, 5(3), 38. https://doi.org/10.3390/joitmc5030038
  14. Dvouletý, O., & Orel, M. (2020). Individual determinants of entrepreneurship in Visegrád countries: Reflection on GEM data from the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia. Entrepreneurial Business and Economics Review, 8(4), 123-137. https://doi.org/10.15678/EBER.2020.080407
  15. Erdoğan, Z. (2020). Eşikler ve Değerler Bağlamında Kırsalda Kadın Örgütlenmeleri: Bursa Üreten Kadın Dernekleri Federasyonu Örneği. Journal of Planning. https://doi.org/10.14744/planlama.2020.46794
  16. Erkut, B. (2016). Product Innovation and Market Shaping: Bridging the Gap with Cognitive Evolutionary Economics. Indraprastha Journal of Management, 4(2), 3-24.
  17. Erkut, B. (2020). Hayek on Product Innovation and Market Shaping: Opening the Black Box. Liberal Düşünce Dergisi, 25(100), 169-189. https://doi.org/10.36484/liberal.757980
  18. Eurostat. (2021a). Active Population by Sex, Age and Citizenship (1 000). http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=lfsa_agan&lang=en
  19. Eurostat. (2021b). Self-Employment by Sex, Age and Country of Birth (1 000). http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=lfsa_esgacob&lang=en
  20. Eurostat. (2021c). Self-Employment by Sex, Age and Educational Attainment Level (1 000). http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do?dataset=lfsa_esgaed&lang=en
  21. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2021a). Total early-stage entrepreneurial activity, established business ownership, perceived opportunities.
  22. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2021b). Total early-stage entrepreneurial activity, established business ownership, perceived opportunities. www.gemconsortium.org/data
  23. Gözüm, A. G. (2019). A Categorical Review of Academic Papers on Entrepreneurship: Academic Pattern of Entrepreneurship in Turkey. Ufuk Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(15), 367-385.
  24. Guerrero, M., Liñán, F., & Cáceres-Carrasco, F. R. (2020). The influence of ecosystems on the entrepreneurship process: a comparison across developed and developing economies. Small Business Economics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-020-00392-2
  25. Gürel, E., Madanoğlu, M., & Altınay, L. (2021). Gender, risk-taking and entrepreneurial intentions: assessing the impact of higher education longitudinally. Education + Training, 63(5), 777-792. https://doi.org/10.1108/ET-08-2019-0190
  26. Hayek, F. A. von. (2002). Competition as a Discovery Procedure. Quarterly Journal of Austrian Economics, 5(3), 9-23.
  27. Herbert, R. F., & Link, A. N. (1989). In search of the meaning of entrepreneurship. Small Business Economics, 1(1), 39-49. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00389915
  28. Kachkar, O. A. (2019). Refugee Entrepreneurship: Empirical Quantitative Evidence on Microenterprises in Refugee Camps in Turkey. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 17(3), 333-352. https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2018.1479913
  29. Kurteğe Sefer, B. (2020). A gender- and class-sensitive explanatory model for rural women entrepreneurship in Turkey. International Journal of Gender and Entrepreneurship, 12(2), 191-210. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJGE-07-2019-0113
  30. Oğuztimur, Ş., & Seçkin, E. (2018). Entrepreneurship as an Instrument of Regional Development. Mehmet Akif Ersoy Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi. https://doi.org/10.30798/makuiibf.357437
  31. Öner, M. A., & Kunday, Ö. (2016). A study on Schumpeterian and Kirznerian entrepreneurship in Turkey: 2006–2013. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 102, 62-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2015.09.005
  32. Özcan, N. A., Şahin, S., & Çankır, B. (2021). The validity and reliability of thriving scale in academic context: Mindfulness, GPA, and entrepreneurial intention among university students. Current Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-021-01590-1
  33. Schwab, K. (2019). The Global Competitiveness Report 2019. World Economic Forum.
  34. Sharma, G. D., Shah, M. I., Shahzad, U., Jain, M., & Chopra, R. (2021). Exploring the nexus between agriculture and greenhouse gas emissions in BIMSTEC region: The role of renewable energy and human capital as moderators. Journal of Environmental Management, 297, 113316. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113316
  35. Sharma, G. D., Thomas, A., & Paul, J. (2021). Reviving tourism industry post-COVID-19: A resilience-based framework. Tourism Management Perspectives, 37, 100786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tmp.2020.100786
  36. Sharma, G. D., Tiwari, A. K., Jain, M., Yadav, A., & Srivastava, M. (2021). COVID-19 and environmental concerns: A rapid review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 148, 111239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2021.111239
  37. Sharma, G. D., Tiwari, A. K., Talan, G., & Jain, M. (2021). Revisiting the sustainable versus conventional investment dilemma in COVID-19 times. Energy Policy, 156, 112467. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enpol.2021.112467
  38. Solomon, S., Bendickson, J. S., Liguori, E. W., & Marvel, M. R. (2021). The effects of social spending on entrepreneurship in developed nations. Small Business Economics. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-021-00458-9
  39. Stoica, O., Roman, A., & Rusu, V. D. (2020). The Nexus between Entrepreneurship and Economic Growth: A Comparative Analysis on Groups of Countries. Sustainability, 12(3), 1186. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12031186
  40. Turkish Statistical Institute. (2020). Küçük ve Orta Büyüklükteki Girişim İstatistikleri, 2019.
  41. Turkish Statistical Institute. (2021a). Adrese Dayalı Nüfus Kayıt Sistemi Sonuçları, 2020. https://data. tuik.gov.tr/Bulten/Index?p=The-Results-of-Address-Based-Population-Registration-System-2020-37210
  42. Turkish Statistical Institute. (2021b). İstatistiklerle Gençlik, 2020.
  43. Witt, U. (2008). What is specific about evolutionary economics? Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 18(5), 547–575. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-008-0107-7
  44. Witt, U. (2014). The future of evolutionary economics: why the modalities of explanation matter. Journal of Institutional Economics, 10(4), 645-664. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1744137414000253
  45. Yalçıntaş, M., İyigün, Ö., & Karabulut, G. (2021). Personal Characteristics and Intention for Entrepreneurship. The Singapore Economic Review, 1-23. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217590821500338
  46. Zutshi, A., Mendy, J., Sharma, G. D., Thomas, A., & Sarker, T. (2021). From Challenges to Creativity: Enhancing SMEs’ Resilience in the Context of COVID-19. Sustainability, 13(12), 6542. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13126542

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Similar Articles

1 2 3 4 5 6 > >> 

You may also start an advanced similarity search for this article.