OECD 23개 주요국가의 기업가 비율 패널 시계열분석 = Long-run Determinants of Business Ownership Rate in 23 OECD Countries : A Panel Cointegration Approach

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

What kind of explanatory variables affect business ownership rate? How is the business ownership rate related to income per capita and what are the direction of causality between them?This paper examines the long-term relationship between business ownership rate and a number of variables for a panel of 23 OECD developed countries over the period from 1980 to 2008. To do this we first investigate the stationarity of variables concerned, then test cointegration among the variables by employing the Westerlund’s (2007) error correction panel method. Commonly used econometrics methods are the so-called first generation panel unit root tests, such as Hadri and Levin A, Lin CF, Chu(=LLC). Because these first-generation tests assume cross-sectional independence, exhibit severe size distortions in the presence of cross-sectional dependence, we also use second-generation panel unit root tests such as CIPS(=cross-sectionally augmented IPS) to allow for cross-sectional dependence. For all level variables, both Hadri and LLC test do not reject the null hypothesis of a unit root at from the 1 % to 5% level. With regard to the first differences of the series, the test statistics are greater than the 1% or 5% critical absolute value and thus the null hypothesis is rejected. The CIPS test results also offer identical conclusions,To test if the null hypothesis of no cointegration can be rejected, Westerlund (2007) has developed two group-mean tests and two analogous panel tests. In the two group-mean based tests, the alternative hypothesis is there is cointegration at least in one cross section unit, which is the same in many traditional panel cointegration tests. Results using two pairs (no intercept, no time trend), (intercept, time trend) and one-period lead and lag values indicate that all four tests reject the null of no cointegration at the 1% or 5% level. Finally we bootstrapped robust critical values for the test statistics. Overall, those results show that there exists a long run cointegrating relationship among the variables in equation.
Having confirmed the stationarity of variables and the existence of a long run relationship between the variables in equation, DOLS(Dynamic OLS) were utilized to estimate the respective parameters. Empirical results show that the sign of estimated parameter coefficients are different between country groups. While income per capita, economic openness, level of human capital, and credit accessibility significantly positive affect business ownership rate in riser country group, the signs of those coefficients in faller group are almost negative. This implies that the parameters of determinants are heterogenous between two groups of countries even though all of these countries are the OECD members. The above interpretation of the estimation results is based on the assumption that long-run causality runs from explanatory variables to business ownership rate. However, while cointegration implies causality in at least one direction, it says nothing about the direction of the causal relationship between the variables, as discussed above. Causality may run in either direction, from income per capita to business ownership rate or from business ownership rate to income per capita, or in both directions. To test the direction of long-run causality, we follow common practice in the applied panel cointegration methods and employ two-step procedure. And same procedure applies to causal relationship between unemployment rate and business ownership rate.
In the first step, we use the DOLS estimate of the long-run relationship to derive the disequilibrium term. In the second step, we estimate the error correction model. From this we conclude that long-run causality is bidirectional, implying that increasing business ownership rate is both a consequence and cause of increasing level of income per capital or decreasing unemployment rate. To check the robustness of this conclusion, we perform a panel Granger causa...

국문 초록 (Abstract)

본 논문은 기업가비율이 실업률, 소득수준과 어떠한 장기적 관계에 있는지, 그리고 어떠한 설명변수들이 기업가비율에 영향을 미치는지 분석한다. 이를 위해 1980년부터 2008년까지 OECD 23개 국가를 패널 분석한다. 잘못된 추정과 편의의 위험을 피하기 위해 분석대상 변수들의 단위근 검정을 통해 수준변수들이 비정상적인지를 검정하고, 비정상적 변수들 간에 공적분관계가 존재하는지를 검정한다. 소득수준, 개방도, 규제정도, 실업률, 금융접근성, 노조 조직률 그리고 제조업비율이 기업가비율과 장기균형관계에 있음을 확인하였다. 기업가비율의 추세는 국가별로 큰 편차를 보이기 때문에, 비슷한 패턴을 보이는 국가그룹으로 분류하여 DOLS추정하였다. 증가추세의 국가그룹에서 소득수준, 개방도, 실업률, 제조업비율, 금융접근성이 유의한 양의 영향을, 인적자본수준과 노조 조직률은 유의한 음의 영향을 주고 있다. 이러한 추정결과는 기업가비율이 감소패턴을 보이는 국가그룹과 상이하다. 감소패턴의 국가그룹에서는 노조 조직률을 제외한 나머지 모든 변수에서 상반된 추정 계수값을 보인다. 즉, 어떤 그룹에 속하는지에 따라 기업가비율에 영향을 미치는 요소의 영향의 방향이 달라진다. 기업가비율이 다른 설명변수들과 반대의 인과관계를 갖는지를 테스트하기 위해 오차수정모형(error correction model)을 추정하였다. 기업가비율은 소득수준 및 실업율과의 관계에서 양방향 인과관계가 성립하며, (기업가비율 ⇄ 소득수준), (기업가비율 ⇄ 실업률)의 충격반응모형을 통해, 충격에도 불구하고 장기균형수준에 수렴함을 보인다.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 신진교, "중소기업의 R&D와 혁신 - 정부정책지원의 조절효과 -" 한국기업경영학회 15 (15): 119-132, 2008

2 김우영, "자영업 비중에 대한 시계열 분석 : 실업률과의 관계를 중심으로" 한국중소기업학회 34 (34): 21-41, 2012

3 송치승, "우리나라 벤처기업 지원정책의 실효성에 관한 분석" 한국기업경영학회 20 (20): 215-240, 2013

4 하규수, "사업에 대한 태도와 실패에 대한 두려움이 창업의욕에 미치는 영향" 한국기업경영학회 19 (19): 59-74, 2012

5 Shane, S., "Why encouraging more people to become entrepreneurs is bad public policy" 33 (33): 141-149, 2009

6 Audretsch, D. B., "What is new about the new economy : sources of growth in the managed and entrepreneurial economies" 10 (10): 267-315, 2001

7 Kumar, K. B., "What Determine Firm Size" NBER 1999

8 Levin, A., "Unit root tests in panel data : asymptotic and finite-sample properties" 108 (108): 1-24, 2002

9 Wennekers, S., "Uncertainty avoidance and the rate of business ownership across 21 OECD countries, 1976-2004" 17 (17): 133-160, 2007

10 Congregado, E., "The role of scale economies in determining firm size in modern economies" 52 (52): 431-455, 2010

11 Poschke, M., "The firm size distribution across countries and skill-biased change in entrepreneurial technology" IZA 2011

12 Robson, M., "The effect of entrepreneurial activity on national economic growth" 24 (24): 311-321, 2005

13 Robson, M., "The contribution of business ownership in bringing down unemployment in Japan" 0506

14 Breitung, J., "The Local Power of Some Unit Root Tests for Panel Data"

15 Melitz, M. J., "The Impact of Trade on Aggregate Industry Productivity and Intra-Industry Reallocations" 71 (71): 1695-1725, 2003

16 Baumol, W., "The Economics of Small Businesses: An International Perspective" Springer Verlag Berlin-Heidelberg 3-23, 2011

17 Im K, "Testing for unit roots in heteregenous panels" 115 (115): 53-74, 2003

18 Hadri, K., "Testing for stationarity in heterogeneous panel data" 3 (3): 148-161, 2000

19 Westerlund, J., "Testing for Error Correction in Panel Data" 69 (69): 709-748, 2007

20 Granger, C., "Some recent development in a concept of causality" 39 (39): 199-211, 1988

21 Blanchflower, D., "Self-employment in OECD countries" 7 (7): 471-505, 2000

22 Wilderman, R., "Self-employment in 23 OECD countries; The role of cultural and economic factors" 1999

23 Diez, F. Z., "Self employment in the Global Economy" Federal Bank of Boston 2013

24 Iyigun, M. F., "Risk, Entrepreneurship, and Human-Capital Accumulation" 88 (88): 454-457, 1998

25 Pedroni, P., "Panel cointegration: Asymptotics and finite sample properties of pooled time series tests with an application to the PPP hypothesis" 20 (20): 597-625, 2004

26 Kao, C., "On the estimation and inference of a cointegrated regression in panel data" 15 : 179-222, 2000

27 Lucas, R. E., "On the Size Distribution of Business Firms" 9 (9): 508-523, 1978

28 Cabral, M. B., "On the Evolution of the Firm Size Distribution : Facts and Theory" 93 (93): 1075-1090, 2003

29 문선웅, "OECD 회원국 자료를 활용한 한국의 자영업 적정규모 추정에 관한 실증연구: 도소매업 및 음식숙박업을 중심으로" 국제지역학회 15 (15): 241-266, 2011

30 OECD, "OECD Employment Outlook" OECD 155-199, 2000

31 Robson, M., "Measuring Business Ownership Across Countries and Over Time: Extending the COMPENDIA Data Base" 2010

32 Klapper, L., "International Differences in Entrepreneurship" University of Chicago Press 129-158, 2010

33 Gomes, P., "Human Capital and the Size Distribution of Firms" IZA 2014

34 Erosa, A., "Financial Intermediation and Occupational Choice in Development" 4 (4): 303-334, 2001

35 Demirgüç-Kunt, A. T. Beck, "Financial Development and Structure Dataset" World Bank 2014

36 Robson, M., "Exploring the relation between religion and business ownership at country level" 2009

37 Parker, S. C., "Explaining International Variations in Self-Employment:Evidence from a Panel of OECD Countries" 71 (71): 287-301, 2004

38 Ács, Z. J., "Entrepreneurship, economic development and institutions" 31 (31): 219-234, 2008

39 Ilmakunnas, P., "Entrepreneurship, Economic Risks, and Risk Insurance in the Welfare State : Results with OECD Data 1978-93" 2 (2): 195-218, 2001

40 Haltiwanger, D., "Entrepreneurship and Job Creation in the U. S" 28 (28): 3-24, 2014

41 OECD, "Enterpreneurship at a Glance OECD"

42 Bjørnskov, C., "Economic freedom and entrepreneurial activity: Some cross-country evidence" 134 (134): 307-328, 2008

43 Carree, M., "Economic Development and Business Ownership : An Analysis Using Data of 23 OECD Countries in the Period 1976-1996" 19 (19): 271-290, 2002

44 Phillips, P. C., "Dynamic Panel Estimation and Homogeneity Testing under Cross Section Dependence" 6 (6): 217-259, 2003

45 Audretsch, D. B., "Does entrepreneurship reduce unemployment?" Tinbergen Institute 2002

46 Robson, M., "Does Stricter Employment Protection Legistration Promote Self-employment?" 21 (21): 309-319, 2003

47 Robson, M., "Business Ownership and Sectoral Growth" 22 (22): 389-419, 2004

48 Pietrobelli, C., "An empirical study of the Dterminants of self-employment in developing countries" 16 : 803-820, 2014

49 Pesaran, H., "A simple panel unit root test in the presence of cross section dependence" 22 (22): 265-315, 2007

50 Maddala, G. S., "A Comparative Study of Unit Root Tests with Panel Data and a New Simple Test" 61 (61): 631-652, 1999