Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-03T00:44:21.972Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

12 - Academic Entrepreneurship in Europe

A Different Perspective

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 June 2012

Mirjam van Praag
Affiliation:
University of Amsterdam; Amsterdam Center for Entrepreneurship; Max Planck Institute of Economics; Tinbergen Institute; IZA Institute for the Study of Labour
Zoltan J. Acs
Affiliation:
George Mason School of Public Policy, Fairfax
David B. Audretsch
Affiliation:
Indiana University, Bloomington
Robert J. Strom
Affiliation:
Kauffman Foundation, Kansas City
Get access

Summary

Introduction

In principle, the academic world can foster entrepreneurship in two manners. First, as advocated in Chapter 8, faculty and doctoral candidates working in specific academic disciplines, such as technical, computer, or medical sciences, can commercialize their research results, for instance as entrepreneurs. The second manner is much less studied. It comes down to creating awareness of entrepreneurial opportunities and teaching the needed skills to students, which is the topic of this chapter.

In Section 12.2, I illustrate why entrepreneurship is to be stimulated in schools, in particular in Europe. I then show, based on economic theory (Section 12.3) and recent empirical evidence (Section 12.4) that the returns to education are very high for entrepreneurs, relative to employees. This leads, under some assumptions, to specific policy and research implications (Section 12.5). The bottom line of these implication, is that entrepreneurship can best be stimulated at institutions of higher education, that is, universities. Therefore, entrepreneurship education and awareness programs, in whatever form, should become part of academic curricula. Experiments to determine which sorts of programs are effective should be made possible by university administrators and stimulated by public policymakers. Moreover, novel research is required to determine which types of schools and universities should stimulate entrepreneurship, and which particular entrepreneurial competencies should be taught at what stage of the educational system.

Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ashenfelter, Orley, and Krueger, Alan. 1994. “Estimates of the Returns to Schooling from a New Sample of Twins.” American Economic Review, 84(5), 1157–1173.Google Scholar
Ashenfelter, Orley, Harmon, Colm, and Oosterbeek, Hessel. 1999. “A Review of the Schooling/Earnings Relationship with Tests for Publication Bias.” Labour Economics, 6, 453–470.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Behrman, Jere, and Rosenzweig, Mark. 1999. “Ability Biases in Schooling Returns and Twins: A Test and New Estimates.” Economics of Education Review, 18(2), 159–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bonjour, Dorothe, Cherkas, Lynn, Haskel, Jonathan, Hawkes, Denise D., and Spector, Tim. 2003. “Returns to Education: Evidence from U.K. Twins.” American Economic Review, 93(5), 1799–1812.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
,Commission of the European Communities. 2006. “Implementing the Community Lisbon Programme: Fostering Entrepreneurial Mindsets through Education and Learning.”COM (2006), 33.Google Scholar
Davidsson, Per, and Honig, Benson. 2003. “The Role of Social and Human Capital among Nascent Entrepreneurs.” Journal of Business Venturing, 18, 301–331.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazear, Edward. 2005. “Entrepreneurship.” Journal of Labor Economics, 23, 649–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leuven, Edwin, Oosterbeek, Hessel, and Klaauw, Bas. 2003. “The Effect of Financial Rewards on Students' Achievement: Evidence from a Randomized Experiment.” SCHOLAR Working Paper Series, WP 38/03.Google Scholar
Levin, Jesse, and Plug, Erik. 1999. “Instrumenting Education and the Returns to Schooling in the Netherlands.” Labour Economics, 6, 521–534.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mincer, Jacob. 1974. Schooling, Experience and Earnings. New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Oreopoulos, Philip. 2006. “Average Treatment Effects of Education when Compulsory School Laws Really Matter.” American Economic Review, 96(1), 152–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, Simon C., and Praag, C. Mirjam. 2006. “Schooling, Capital Constraints and Entrepreneurial Performance: The Endogenous Triangle.” Journal of Business and Economic Statistics, 24, 416–431.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riley, John. 2002. “Weak and Strong Signals.” Scandinavian Journal of Economics, 104, 213–236.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rouse, Cecilia. 1999. “Further Estimates of the Economic Return to Schooling from a New Sample of Twins.” Economics of Education Review, 18(2), 149–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schumpeter, Joseph A. 1943 (1911). The Theory of Economic Development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Spence, A. Michael. 1973. Market Signaling: Information Transfer in Hiring and Related Processes. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Sluis, Justin, Praag, C. Mirjam, and Vijverberg, Wim. 2005a. “Education and Entrepreneurship in Industrialized Countries: A Meta-Analysis.” Tinbergen Institute Working Paper No. TI 03-046/3.
Sluis, Justin, Praag, C. Mirjam, and Vijverberg, Wim. 2005b. “Entrepreneurship Selection and Performance: A Meta-Analysis of the Impact of Education in Less Developed Countries.” World Bank Economic Review, 19(2), 225–261.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sluis, Justin, Praag, C. Mirjam, and Witteloostuijn, Arjen. 2005c. “Comparing the Returns to Education for Entrepreneurs and Employees.” Tinbergen Institute Discussion Paper No. TI 04-104/3.
Sluis, Justin, and Praag, C. Mirjam. 2006. “Identifying the Difference in Returns to Education for Entrepreneurs and Employees: Identification by Means of Changes in Compulsory Schooling Laws.” Unpublished working paper, Tinbergen Institute.
Weick, Karl. 1996. “Drop Your Tools: An Allegory for Organizational Studies.” Administrative Science Quarterly, 41, 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolpin, Kenneth I. 1977. “Education and Screening.” American Economic Review, 67, 949–958.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure [email protected] is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×