Global Entrepreneurship
Monitor2022/2023 Global Report
Adapting to a “New Normal”

AUTHORSGEM Global
Professor Stephen Hill, DSc (Lead Author)
Aileen Ionescu-Somers, PhD
Professor Alicia Coduras, PhD
GEM Chile
Professor Maribel Guerrero, PhD, Arizona State University, USA, and Universidad del Desarrollo, Chile
GEM Israel
Professor Emeritus Ehud Menipaz, P.Eng, Ben Gurion University
GEM Morocco
Fatima Boutaleb, PhD, Hassan II University of Casablanca
GEM Poland
Professor Przemysław Zbierowski, PhD, University of Economics in Katowice
GEM Turkey
Professor Thomas Schøtt, PhD, University of Agder, Norway
GEM UK
Professor Sreevas Sahasranamam, PhD, University of Strathclyde, Glasgow
GEM USA
Professor Jeffrey Shay, PhD, Babson College
In collaboration with GEM National Teams, the GEM Global Data Team — Francis Carmona and Alicia
Coduras — produced the Economy Profiles in Part 2 and all figures and tables, while Kevin Anselmo
produced the Entrepreneur Profiles used throughout the report.
Although GEM data were used in the preparation of this report, the interpretation and use of the data are
the sole responsibility of the authors.
Published by the Global Entrepreneurship Research Association, London Business School,
Regents Park, London NW1 4SA, UK
Please cite as: GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor) (2023). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor
2022/2023 Global Report: Adapting to a “New Normal”. London: GEM.
Cover image:iStock.com/marrio31
Design and production:
Witchwood Production House http://www.witchwoodhouse.com
BBR Design https://bbrdesign.co.uk© 2023 The authors and the Global Entrepreneurship Research Association (GERA)

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportContents
GEM Policy Influence: Examples fromthe UK, Guatemala and the USA 

6

2. The Social and Cultural
Foundations of Entrepreneurship  37
2.1

Key GEM Definitions and Abbreviations  8
Acknowledgements 

10Foreword 

11

About GEM 

13

The influence of society and culture 37

2.2 The recognition of opportunities 

38

2.3 Can I start a business? 

43

2.4 Investing in someone else’s business 46

2.5 Conclusions and policy implications 49

3. Levels of Entrepreneurial Activity
Across the Globe in 2022 

50

3.1

Measuring entrepreneurial activity 50

3.2 Where is entrepreneurial activity highest? 50

3.3 How has the pandemic affected levels ofentrepreneurship? 

55

Executive Summary 

15

Key findings 15Conclusions 

19

3.4 In what sectors are new businesses started —and does this matter? 

59

Report format 

20

3.5 Conclusions and policy implications 60

4. Entrepreneurial Motivations andResponsibilities 

61

Key Thoughts for Policymakers fromthe GEM 2022/2023 Global Report
Authors 

21Part 1 Analysis 25

1. What Is GEM? 

26

1.1

Brief introduction 

26

1.2

The global context 

26

1.3

Why entrepreneurship matters 

27

1.4

The GEM methodology 

29

1.5

GEM 2022 participating economies 

32

1.6

The impact of the pandemic on householdincomes 

34Conclusion 

36

1.7

4.1

Introduction: a world of change 

61

4.2 Changing the world 61

4.3 Why start a business? 62

4.4 Becoming a digital world 66

4.5 Social and environmental responsibilities 

68

4.6 Entrepreneurship and the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 70

4.7 Conclusions and policy implications 

72

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report15. The Impacts of Entrepreneurial
Activity 
5.1

What determines entrepreneurial impacts? 

73

5.2

Entrepreneurship and the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 

73

Part 2 National Contexts
and Economy Profiles  103
8. The Context for Entrepreneurship  105
8.1 Introduction 

105

76

8.2 Defining and assessing context 

105

5.4 Entrepreneurship and innovation 

79

5.5

Entrepreneurship and competitiveness35 

81

8.3 Contemporary Entrepreneurial Framework
Conditions (EFCs) 

107

5.6 Entrepreneurship and international revenue 

83

5.7

84

8.4 The National Entrepreneurship Context
Index (NECI) 

108

8.5 The evolution of NECI 

110

86

8.6 The entrepreneurial environment andinnovation 

111

86

8.7 Conclusions and policy implications 112

5.3 Entrepreneurship and employment
expectations Conclusions and policy implications 

6. All Kinds of Entrepreneurs 
6.1

Introduction 

6.2 The entrepreneurial gender gap 

87

6.3 The entrepreneurial age gap 

90

6.4 The entrepreneurial graduation gap 

91

6.5 Conclusions and policy implications 92

7. Exiting a Business 

2

73

94

7.1

Introduction 

94

7.2

Exit rates and Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) 

94

7.3

The pandemic and exit rates 

97

7.4

Exit and continuation 

98

7.5

Reasons for exit 

99

7.6

Conclusions and policy implications 

100

Economy Profiles 

114Part 3 Appendix Tables 217
GEM Indicators 218

GEM Global Sponsor 

250

Report Sponsors 

251

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportFigures
Figure 1.1

The GEM Conceptual Framework 

28

Figure 1.2

The entrepreneurial process and GEM indicators 

30

Figure 1.3

The impact of the pandemic on household income 34

Figure 2.1

Knowing someone who has started a business in the last two years (% adults) 

38

Figure 2.2

In the next six months, there will be good opportunities to start a business in my area(% adults agree) 

40

In the next six months there will be good opportunities to start a business in my area
(figures for 2019 and 2022, 37 economies; % adults agree) 

41

Figure 2.4

In my country, it is easy to start a business (% adults agree) 

41

Figure 2.5

I have the knowledge, skills and experience to start my own business (% adults agree)  43

Figure 2.6

You would not start a business for fear it might fail (% of those agreeing there aregood opportunities locally) Figure 2.3

44

Figure 2.7

Are you expecting to start a business in the next three years? (% adults responding yes)  46

Figure 2.8

Informal investors (% adults) 

47

Figure 2.9

Median amount invested ($US) by those investing in someone else’s new business 

47

Figure 3.1

Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) and Established Business Ownership(EBO) (both % adults) 

51

Figure 3.2

Levels of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity and GDP per capita 

52

Figure 3.3

Levels of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity and the UN Human Development
Index 54

Levels of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity each year since 2019 (32economies participating in GEM for all four years; % adults) 

55

The percentage of those starting or running a new business who think doing so ismore difficult (includes both somewhat and much more difficult) than one year ago(% Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity) 

56

The percentage of those starting a new business who agree that the pandemic has
led to new opportunities they wish to pursue, and the proportion of those runningestablished businesses who are pursuing such opportunities (% Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity and % Established Business Ownership) 

57

Business services and consumer services as a percentage of Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity (% TEA) 

59

The proportion of those starting or running a new business and reporting lower
growth expectations than a year ago (% Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity) 62

Expectations of lower growth for new entrepreneurs: comparison between 2021 and2022 (38 economies; % Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity). 

63Agreement with motivations “to make a difference in the world” and “to build great
wealth or very high income” (% Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity) 

64

Figure 3.4
Figure 3.5

Figure 3.6

Figure 3.7
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.3

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report3Figure 4.4
Figure 4.5

Figure 4.6

Figure 4.7

Agreement with motivations “to continue a family tradition” and “to earn a living
because jobs are scarce” (% Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity) 

64

The proportion of those starting or running a new business, or running anestablished business, who expect to use more digital technologies to sell theirproducts or services in the next six months (% Total early-stage Entrepreneurial
Activity and % Established Business Ownership). 

66“When making decisions about the future of my business, I always consider social
implications” (agree, % Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity and % Established
Business Ownership) 

69“When making decisions about the future of my business, I always consider
environmental implications” (agree, % Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity and% Established Business Ownership) 

69

Figure 4.8 Are you aware of the 17 United Nations Sustainable Development Goals? (% Total
early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity and % Established Business Ownership) Figure 5.1

Figure 5.2
Figure 5.3
Figure 5.4
Figure 5.5
Figure 5.6

Figure 5.7

The percentage of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) agreeing that they
always take environmental implication into account in 2022, minus that percentage
in 2021 

74

Job growth expectations among early-stage entrepreneurs expecting to employ 0, 1–5
or 6 or more people in five years’ time (% adults) 

76

The percentage of those starting or running a new business and expecting to employ
no additional people in five years’ time (% Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity) 

77

The proportion of adults starting a new business with products or services that were
new to their area, new to their country, or new to the world 

79

The proportion of adults starting a new business with any technologies or proceduresthat are either new to their area, new to their country or new to the world 80

The level of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) and those within this thatwill have only customers in their local area, only within their country and those thatwill have international customers (% adults) 

81

The percentage of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) anticipating 25% ormore of revenue from outside their country 

83

Figure 6.1

Levels of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) by gender (% women, % men) 87

Figure 6.2

Levels of Established Business Ownership (EBO) by gender (% women, % men) 

88

Figure 6.3

Relative gender gaps for new businesses (female % TEA/male % TEA) and forestablished businesses (female % EBO/male % EBO) 

89

The relative entrepreneurial gender gap (female Total early-stage Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA)/male TEA), 2022 and 2019 

89

The level of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) for adults aged 18–34 andfor those aged 35–64 (% of adults in each age group) 

91

The level of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) for graduates and fornon-graduates (% of adults in each age group) 

92

Figure 7.1

The level of business exits in the previous 12 months (% adults) 

95

Figure 7.2

Scatterplot of exit rates and Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) rates(both % adults) 

96

The ratio of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) to business exits (both% adults) 

96

Figure 6.4
Figure 6.5
Figure 6.6

Figure 7.3

4

70

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportFigure 7.4

The percentage of adults exiting a business, 2019–2022 

97

Figure 7.5

The percentage of adults exiting a business and reporting that the business did, or
did not, continue 

98

Figure 7.6

Reasons for exiting a business: negative, COVID-related and positive (all % adults) 

99

Figure 7.7

The percentage of business exits attributed to the pandemic (% exits), 2020–2022 

100

Figure 8.1

Number of Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions (from 13) scored as sufficient or
better (score ≥5.0) (51 economies, 2022) 

108

Figure 8.2

National Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI) 2022 

109

Figure 8.3

Scatterplot of National Entrepreneurial Context Index and Global Innovation Indexscores (both for 2022) 

111

TablesTable 1.1

Economies in GEM 2022, categorized by income group (GDP/cap) 

33

Table 3.1

Number of economies in each category by income group 

51

Table 8.1

National Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions: Summary 

106

Table 8.2

Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions: highest and lowest scores by income level 

107

Table A1

Impact of pandemic on household income in past year (% of adults aged 18–64 ) 

220

Table A2

Entrepreneurial activity (% of adults aged 18–64) 

224

Table A3

Public attitudes and perceptions (% of adults aged 18–64 somewhat or strongly agree) 226

Table A4

Attitudes and perceptions of entrepreneurs: % of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA) and % of Established Business Ownership (EBO) 

230

Table A5

Entrepreneurial activity by age, gender and education 

234

Table A6

Sector distribution of new entrepreneurial activity(% of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity) 

238

Business exits, and reason for exit (positive, negative [non-COVID] and COVIDrelated), % of adults aged 18–64 

240

Table A8

Entrepreneurial expectations and scope (% of adults aged 18–64) 

242

Table A9The motivation to start a business (% of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity
who somewhat or strongly agree) 

246

National Entrepreneurship Context Index and number of Entrepreneurial Framework
Conditions (EFCs) scored as sufficient or better (score ≥5) 

248

Table A7

Table A10

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

5

GEM Policy Influence:
Examples fromthe UK, Guatemala
and the USA“GEM research has certainly influenced policymakers’
discussions about entrepreneurship.”These are the words of Mark Hart, GEM UK Team Lead and Deputy Director of Enterprise
Research Centre at Aston Business School, shared during a GEM webinar held in
November 2022.
“Throughout the years, GEM data has been
consistently used by government officials in
Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland and the United
Kingdom,” said Hart. “Individuals from a range
of departments look at our reports and seek tounderstand them. We have discussions all thetime with officials on how GEM data can impact
policy. There is particular interest around gender,
ethnicity and immigration.”An example of such a conversation was
the Savvitas Business & Parliament Forumwhich took place on 6 December at the Chess
Room, House of Commons. Over lunch, Hart
and GEM Executive Director Aileen IonescuSomers shared key findings from the GEM
2021/2022 Women’s Entrepreneurship Report
and their implications for UK enterprise policy(participants are featured in the image above).
Outcomes from the discussion with the officials
will be taken forward as policy suggestions
across government and to all political parties
and relevant bodies.
The Savvitas Business& Parliament Forum,
6 December 2022,
Chess Room, House ofCommons, London.
Standing, left to right:
Paula Whitehouse(Director, Aston Centre for
Growth); Claire Harwood(Permira Credit);
Shernett Ranson (Cabinet
Office); Catherine Wright(Silicon Valley Bank);
Helene Martin Gee (President,
Savvitas — savvy womenwith gravitas!!); Jill Pay(The Gender Index); andAileen Ionescu-Somers(CEO, GEM Global).
Seated: Professor MarkHart (Deputy Director,
ERC and GEM UK Lead).

6

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

“Entrepreneurial
Intentions, Total
Entrepreneurial Activity,
Established Business
Ownership, andBusiness Closure
Activity by Race andEthnicity in the US
Adult Population,
2021”, from the GEM
2021/2022 UnitedStates Report

Mónica Río Nevado de Zelaya, Dean of the
School of Economic Sciences at the Universidad
Francisco Marroquín and head of the GEM
Guatemala Team, noted on the webinar that
her team’s research has significant influenceamong the media and with policymakers in the
country.
“When we launch our National Report, weare very visible in the press, and throughout theyear we present results to different groups,” shesaid. “GEM is an indicator referenced for goodresults by the Economics Ministry Department
in Guatemala. Everyone here uses GEM as thereference point for entrepreneurial activity.”
Most poignantly, GEM research in Guatemala
helped influence a new law on entrepreneurship.
The GEM Guatemala Team shared feedback aboutchanges to make to the law due to the evidence
from GEM data. Some of these recommendations
were adopted.
“One of the main purposes of our university is
to increase freedom of action for entrepreneurs,”
explained Nevado de Zelaya. “That is why GEM is
so important. We want to read the answers fromour entrepreneurs to know what is holding themback and to make this visible. This increases thepossibility of entrepreneurs to act more freely andto move forward in a better way.”

In the United States, White House officials
have previously drawn on GEM results. The GEM
USA research team has provided testimony to theUnited States House of Representatives Committee
on Small Business. There is great potential forpolicymakers concerned about racial equity toleverage the findings from the latest GEM USA
Report which features breakdowns across white,black and hispanic entrepreneurs (see the graphic
for an example).
“We provide breakdowns in various ways,”said Jeff Shay, Professor of Entrepreneurship at
Babson College and head of the GEM USA Team.
“If I am a policymaker and I want to make thecase for funding my diverse city or state, I would
be drawing on GEM’s data.”
Concluded Ionescu-Somers: “The above arejust a few examples that highlight how we provide
policymakers everything they need to know
about entrepreneurship in a country, region orcity. Our GEM data tells a remarkable story about
entrepreneurship over some 23 years. However,aside from tracking and monitoring the data,
it is equally important for GEM to provide an
up-to-date year-on-year narrative to policymakers
so that, in turn, they can make decisions thatpave the way for more successful, high-quality
entrepreneurship in their countries.”

To explore collaboration possibilities with GEM, contact info@gemconsortium.org.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report7Key GEM Definitions andAbbreviations
Adult Population
Survey (APS)The APS is a comprehensive interview questionnaire, administered to a minimum of 2,000 adults
in each GEM economy, designed to collect detailed information on the entrepreneurial activities,
attitudes and aspirations of respondents.

National Expert
Survey (NES)The NES is completed by selected experts in each GEM economy and collects views on the context
in which entrepreneurship takes place in that economy. It provides information about the aspects ofa country’s socio-economic characteristics that, according to research, have a significant impact onnational entrepreneurship: referred to as the Entrepreneurship Framework Conditions (EFCs).

Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA)

The percentage of adults (aged 18–64) who are starting or running a new business.

Established Business
Ownership (EBO)
Entrepreneurial
Framework
Conditions (EFCs)

The percentage of adults (aged 18–64) who are currently the owner-manager of an establishedbusiness, i.e. owning and managing a business that has paid salaries, wages or any other payments
to the owners, for more than 42 months.
The conditions identified by GEM that enhance (or hinder) new business creation in a given
economy, and form the framework for the NES. The conditions are:
A1. Entrepreneurial Finance Are there sufficient funds for new startups?
A2. Ease of Access to Entrepreneurial Finance And are those funds easy to access?
B1. Government Policy: Support and Relevance Do they promote and support startups?
B2. Government Policy: Taxes and Bureaucracy Or are new businesses burdened?
C. Government Entrepreneurial Programs Are quality support programs available?
D1. Entrepreneurial Education at School Do schools introduce entrepreneurship ideas?
D2. Entrepreneurial Education Post-School Do colleges offer courses in starting a business?
E. Research and Development Transfers Can research be translated into new businesses?
F. Commercial and Professional Infrastructure Are these sufficient and affordable?
G1. Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics Are markets free, open and growing?
G2. Ease of Entry: Burdens and Regulation Do regulations encourage or restrict entry?
H. Physical Infrastructure Is this sufficient and affordable?
I. Social and Cultural Norms Does culture encourage and celebrate entrepreneurship?

National
Entrepreneurial
Context Index (NECI)

This summarizes in one figure the average state of 13 national Entrepreneurial Framework
Conditions selected by GEM researchers as the most reliable determinants of a favourable
environment for entrepreneurship. It is calculated as the simple average of 13 variables that
represent the EFCs, and which have been measured through a block of items evaluated by an
11-point Likert scale and summarized by applying factorial analyses (principal component method).

National TeamGEM is a consortium of “National Teams”. Each Team is led by a local university or other institution
with a strong interest in entrepreneurship. The team is the official national representative of
the project: responsible for collecting GEM data in the country on an annual basis, producing a“National Report” on their findings, and acting as the point of contact for GEM enquiries.

8

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

GEM Income Classification
Level A

Economies with a Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita of more than $40,000.

Level B

Economies with a GDP per capita of between $20,000 and $40,000.

Level C

Economies with a GDP per capita of less than $20,000.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report9Acknowledgements
It is a great pleasure to present Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor’s 2022/2023 Global
Report: Adapting to a “New Normal”. The GEM
Global Report is published annually and requires
the time, expertise and resources of several
hundred people around the world, including
technical experts at top academic institutions
and research institutes, sponsoring organizations
and national experts. Our first acknowledgement
therefore goes to our dedicated GEM National
Teams and to their sponsors, without whose
efforts and support GEM would not be able topoint to 24 years of existence.
One of our founding organizations and GEM
Global Sponsor, Babson College, has, over many
years, devoted very substantial financial andin-kind resources to GEM. 2022 was no exception.
For Babson College’s unconditional contributions,both in 2022 and in the past two decades, we areexceedingly grateful. In particular, we thank theleadership of Babson’s Arthur M. Blank Schoolfor Entrepreneurial Leadership, Donna Levin,Jeffrey Shay and Smaiyra Million, as well as
Donna Kelley, Babson’s Frederic C. Hamilton
Professor of Free Enterprise Studies, for theirstrong support.
We also warmly thank the Cartier Women’s
Initiative (CWI), with which GEM has had astrategic partnership for the last three years.
Acknowledgement goes to Wingee Sampaio,
Global Program Director of CWI for her passionate
interest in GEM’s activities and willingness tohelp us boost the women’s entrepreneurship
dimensions of GEM research. We highly
appreciate CWI’s generous financial support
for both the GEM Global Report and the GEM
Women’s Entrepreneurship Report.
The School of Management Fribourg(HEG-FR) at the University of Applied Sciences
Western Switzerland has also dedicatedfinancial resources for GEM’s work on women’s
entrepreneurship and on the contributionof entrepreneurship to the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals. Both of these
themes figure prominently in this Global Report.
We warmly thank Professor Rico Baldegger,
Director and Professor of Strategy, Innovation and
Entrepreneurship at the School of Management
Fribourg (HEG-FR), Switzerland, for this support
and also for hosting the launch of this report at
his institution in February 2023.
This report, expertly orchestrated by Stephen
Hill as main author, brings together results
and analysis from GEM National Team authors
across the world. There are too many co-authors
to list here (they are named in the individual
chapters), but their work is highly appreciatedsince it brings a high degree of diversity to GEM
thought leadership and helps us to truly reflect
a global perspective on the “state of the art” ofentrepreneurship. Special recognition is dueto two of the co-authors — Thomas Schøtt andSreevas Sahasranamam — for their additional
efforts to review the entire report.
GEM is fortunate to have an extremely
dedicated GEM Global core team that work
virtually and truly globally from Tokyo, Spain,
Portugal, Switzerland, the United Kingdom andthe United States. We acknowledge the carefulproject management and data harmonization
work of our data managers, Francis Carmonaand Alicia Coduras, with support from Henrique
Bastos, and the efforts of our Communications
Advisor Kevin Anselmo, especially for his great
work with Steve on the Economy Profiles. We
appreciate the tireless efforts of Stephen Hill and
Dean Bargh, of Witchwood Production House,in steering the final draft of this complex reportto successful completion. Last, but certainly
not least, thanks to our GEM Finance andAdministration Manager Aurea Almanso for her
unfailing dedication to ensuring that GEM runs
smoothly, like the 24-year-old well-oiled machinethat it is. To all, warm thanks and appreciation.
Aileen Ionescu-Somers, PhD
GEM Executive Director

10

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportForeword
The well-known opening line of A Tale of Two
Cities by Charles Dickens may well apply to thecurrent world state of affairs: “It was the best oftimes; it was the worst of times . . .” There is no
doubt that, depending on where you live in theworld, many are effectively experiencing the worst
times of their lives to date, because of the spillover
effects of multiple crises. The remaining economic
impacts of the global COVID-19 pandemic and thesignificant consequences of conflict in Ukraine
have produced unprecedented global supply
chain disruptions, increases in energy andfood prices, and overall commotion in markets
worldwide.
However, the quote is interestingly paradoxical
since out of crisis, very often, come opportunities.
For some at least, that means the worst of times
can truly become the best of times. We at GEM
would suggest that, in many ways, it is the best oftimes for entrepreneurs. The world is undergoingan energy crisis and, in many countries, an energy
transition that struggles to take hold. We are living
through a time of increasing climate change anddecreasing biodiversity, requiring substantial
mitigation and adaptation. After a period ofmarked progress in alleviating extreme poverty, it
is unfortunately again taking hold in some regions
across the world. Markets are rapidly shifting.
Our supply chains are clearly not resilient enoughor designed to be shock-proof. Our retail anddistribution systems are disrupting. Our global
economic monetary system is transforming by theday. The pandemic catapulted the world towards
a so-called “New Normal”, which has not yet
fully landed in the collective conscience suchthat it can be properly described. However, canall these phenomenal events, and multiple others
not mentioned here, constitute opportunities forentrepreneurs? The answer, of course, is “Yes!”
Entrepreneurship is undoubtedly — and has

always been — an important part of the solution
to repair damaged economies and societies.
Results presented in our GEM 2022/2023 Global
Report show that not only are policymakers insome countries striving harder to make it easierfor entrepreneurs to put down their commercial“roots” and create successful businesses, but
entrepreneurs themselves are clearly dustingthemselves off from the hardship effects of the
global pandemic and continuing to do what they
do best: grasp opportunities. If the interface
between policymaking and entrepreneurshipis working effectively, then entrepreneurshipcan contribute richly to economic recovery,
thus making economies more resilient and,dare we hope, shock-proof. At the very least,
entrepreneurs can help economies return to the“best of times”.
As always, the GEM Global Report is basedon hard data collected from literally thousandsof entrepreneurs and national experts aroundthe world. This 2022/2023 Global Report adds
a 24th year of data collection and results to the
GEM portfolio. Our aspiration at GEM is clear:to provide transparency to policymakers so thatthey can make better decisions to truly promote
entrepreneurship, and also observe and act on
the impact of their decision-making over time.
A fundamental question is: Can policymakers
transform the results of our research into robust
and productive decision-making, allowing
increasing numbers of entrepreneurs to create
wealth and contribute to societal well-being
worldwide? Based on our scientific observations
at GEM from over the years, the answer to thisquestion is also a resounding “Yes!”
Here’s to a return to the “best of times” in the“New Normal”, however that lands, leaving no
one behind.
Aileen Ionescu-Somers, PhD
GEM Executive Director
José Ernesto Amorós Espinosa, PhD
GEM–GERA Board Chair and GEM Mexico

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

11

GLOBAL TEAM

Aileen Ionescu-Somers, PhD
Executive Director
asomers@gemconsortium.org

Kevin Anselmo
Communications Advisor

Jonathan Francis Carmona, MSc
Data Team Supervisor

Aurea Almanso, MBA
Operations, GEM Global
aalmanso@gemconsortium.org

Stephen Hill, DSc
2022/23 Global Report
Lead Author

Professor Alicia Coduras, PhD
National Expert
Survey Coordinator

GOVERNANCE BOARD

José Ernesto Amorós, PhD
Interim Board Chair
National Team Representative
GEM Mexico

Fatem Boutaleb, PhD
National Team Representative
GEM Morocco

Maribel Guerrero, PhD
National Team Representative
GEM Chile

Jeffrey Shay, PhD
National Team Representative
GEM USA

Niels Bosma, PhD
Senior Research Advisor
National Team Representative
GEM UK

Ehud Menipaz, PhD
National Team Representative
GEM Israel

GEM APS GRIPS* GROUPGEM NES GRIPS* GROUP

Coordination: Aileen Ionescu-Somers & Francis Carmona, GEM Global

Coordination: Alicia Coduras, GEM Global & GEM Saudi Arabia

Niels Bosma, GEM Senior Research Advisor/GEM UK
Ana Fernández-Laviada and Nuria Calvo, GEM Spain
Christian Friedl, GEM Austria
Maribel Guerrero, GEM Chile
Mark Hart, GEM UK
Peter Josty, GEM Canada
Mahdi Majbouri, GEM USA

Miguel Angoitia, GEM Spain
Niels Bosma, GEM Senior Research Advisor/GEM UK
Chafik Bouhaddioui, GEM UAE
Angus Bowmaker-Falconer, GEM South Africa
Simara Greco, GEM BrazilMark Hart, GEM UK
Jeffrey Shay, GEM USA
Anna Tarnawa, GEM Poland* GRIPs = GEM Research & Innovation Projects

12

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportAbout GEM
Entrepreneurship is an essential driver of societal
health and wealth. It is also a formidable engine
of economic growth. It promotes the essential
innovation required not only to exploit newopportunities, promote productivity and create
employment, but to also address some of society’s
greatest challenges, such as the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) or the
economic shock wave created by the COVID-19
pandemic. The promotion of entrepreneurshipwill be central to multiple governments worldwide
for the foreseeable future, especially considering
the significant negative impacts on economies
due to the pandemic. Governments and otherstakeholders will increasingly need hard, robust
and credible data to make key decisions that
stimulate sustainable forms of entrepreneurshipand promote healthy entrepreneurial ecosystems
worldwide. During its 24 years of existence,
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) has
repeatedly contributed to such efforts, providing
policymakers with valuable insights on how tobest foster entrepreneurship to propel growth andprosperity once again.
GEM carries out survey-based researchon entrepreneurship and entrepreneurshipecosystems around the world. GEM is a networked
consortium of national country teams primarily
associated with top academic institutions. It is
the only global research source that collects dataon entrepreneurship directly from individual
entrepreneurs. GEM tools and data are therefore
unique and benefit numerous stakeholder groups.
By becoming involved with GEM:
• Academics are able to apply uniquemethodological approaches to studying
entrepreneurship at the national level;• Policymakers are able to make betterinformed decisions to help entrepreneurs
and entrepreneurial ecosystems thrive;• Entrepreneurs have better knowledge on
where to invest sometimes scarce resources

and how to influence key stakeholders sothat they get the support they need;• Sponsors both advance their organizational
interests and gain a higher profile throughtheir association with GEM;
• International organizations leverage insights,
but can also incorporate or integrate GEM
indicators to their own data sets, or use GEM
data as a benchmark for their own analyses.
GEM has an impressive and highly credible
track record. In numbers, GEM represents:• 24 years of data, allowing longitudinal
analysis in and across geographies on
multiple levels;• Up to 170,000+ interviews annually withexperts and adult populations including
entrepreneurs of all ages;• Data from 120 economies across fivecontinents;• Collaboration with over 500 specialists inentrepreneurship research;• Involvement of some 300+ academic andresearch institutions;• Support from more than 200 funding
institutions.
GEM began in 1999 as a joint research project
between Babson College (USA) and London
Business School (UK). The consortium has become
the richest source of reliable information on thestate of entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial
ecosystems across the globe, publishing not only
the GEM Global Report annually, but also a rangeof national and special topic reports each year.
GEM’s first annual study covered 10 countries;
since then some 120 countries from every cornerof the globe have participated in GEM research.
As a result, GEM has gone beyond a project tobecome the highly networked organization that
it is today. GEM can confidently stake a claim tobe the largest ongoing study of entrepreneurial
dynamics in the world.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report13

Join our research project
It is diﬃcult for policymakers to makeinformed decisions without having the rightdata. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM)
fills this void. GEM is the only global research
project that collects data on entrepreneurshipdirectly from the source—entrepreneurs!
It is your one-stop shop for everything youneed to know about entrepreneurship inyour country, region or city.
Be part of future Global Reports, providing
a snapshot of entrepreneurial activity acrossthe world. You can contribute towards
National Reports that include international
benchmarking, local context and national
entrepreneurship policy recommendations.

“GEM oﬀers academics the opportunity to bepart of a prestigious network, explore various
dimensions of entrepreneurship and gain a full
picture about the entrepreneurial activity of acountry.”
Virginia Lasio, Team Leader of
GEM Ecuador and Professor at the ESPAE
Graduate School of Management

For more information, visit www.gemconsortium.org or write info@gemconsortium.org

Executive Summary
Stephen Hill, Aileen Ionescu-Somers and Ehud Menipaz

Entrepreneurship, or the act of starting and running a new business, is a key catalystof economic development. It is also an important driver of economic recovery: fromthe effects of the recent COVID-19 pandemic as well as more recent shocks, such as
the war between Russia and Ukraine, with its related supply chain issues and risingenergy costs. At any time, but especially during times of crisis, it is vital that theentrepreneurship dynamics and national frameworks to promote entrepreneurship are
carefully defined and measured. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) research canprovide significant metrics to policymakers along the road to economic recovery, whichenable informed and astute — but, most importantly, effective — decision-making.
This 2022/2023 Global Report presents the results of GEM’s 24th research cycle. This
adds another round of extensive national surveys to an already substantial GEM
database of entrepreneurial results. In 2022, over 170,000 individuals were interviewed
across 49 different economies, adding their views and experiences to over 3 million
previously interviewed for the GEM Adult Population Survey (APS) over the previous
two decades. These 49 economies represent about two-thirds of the global population in
2022. It includes China with a population of 1.3 billion, as well as India, which according
to the United Nations is likely to be declared the world’s most populous country in 2023.
Furthermore, GEM’s National Expert Survey (NES) features 51 economies (all of the 49
economies that participated in the GEM APS, plus Italy and Argentina). The NES is asurvey of national experts in each economy charged with assessing the key components
and characteristics of the entrepreneurial environment for that economy.

KEY FINDINGS•

Although the worst effects of the COVID-19 pandemic appear to be coming
to an end, its economic impacts are still being felt across the globe andhousehold incomes continue to be reduced. As noted in the two previous
Global Reports, the pandemic hit hardest those who could least afford it. Within thegroup of lowest-income economies (Level C), the share of adults reporting that the
pandemic had reduced their household income ranged from almost nine out of 10
in Togo to just over half in Iran. Among the high-income (Level A) economies, that
range was from two out of three in the United Arab Emirates to less than one in 10 in
Norway.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report15THE PANDEMIC HIT HARDEST THOSE WHO COULD LEAST AFFORD IT

Share of adults reporting that the pandemic had reduced their household income — by income category(weighted by population size; including the five economies who were the hardest hit)

LEVEL Baverage

62%

Mexico (78%)

India (74%)

LEVEL A Venezeula (79%)
averageTogo (88%)

32%

Indonesia (75%)

LEVEL Caverage

72%
Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

16•

Fear of failure is a serious constraint on business startups in many economies
from all income groups. In a number of economies, with examples including
Brazil, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, the Netherlands, Puerto Rico and Poland, highproportions of adults agree that starting a business is relatively easy, and see good
opportunities to start a business locally, while also considering themselves to havethe skills and experience to create a startup. However, around half of those seeing
such opportunities are nevertheless deterred from taking action by fear of failure.
Reducing the risks and perceived costs of new business failure — for example, by
making changes to insolvency regulations, or better promoting entrepreneurial
successes and role models — could have a positive impact in increasing startup
rates, in particular for women.

•

The impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on entrepreneurial perceptions acrossthe globe has been highly varied, with some counterintuitive findings. Of the
38 economies participating in the APS in both 2019 (thus pre-pandemic) and again
in 2022, there were 12 economies in which the percentage of adults seeing good
local opportunities to start a business fell by five points or more. These included
developed economies such as the United States (−21 percentage points), Poland(−15) and Greece (−14). However, there were another nine economies in which that
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Reportpercentage actually increased by more than five points: including Puerto Rico (+25),
Brazil (+21) and Saudi Arabia (+16). Further research is required to explain thesedifferences, but one key may be the level of support that governments were willing(and able) to offer to businesses and households.
•

In 2022, the highest levels of early-stage entrepreneurial activity were in
the Latin America & Caribbean region. However, levels of entrepreneurial
activity were also highly variable from country to country. Of the 49 economies thatparticipated in the GEM APS, just six had more than one in four adults starting or
running a new business: Guatemala, Colombia, Panama, Chile, Uruguay and theUnited Arab Emirates. In contrast, three economies had less than one in 20 adults
doing the same: Morocco, Greece and Poland. The explanation for these differences
may lie with social and cultural norms as much as with economic variables.

•

There is a negative association between the level of early-stage
entrepreneurial activity and human capital development, as measured by the
UN Human Development Index (HDI). Previous GEM Global Reports have noteda negative association between Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)
rates and levels of GDP per capita, even if that association has weakened over theyears. This 2022/2023 Global Report tested an alternative measure of well-being— the UN HDI — and found that this also had a negative association with TEA
rates. This also raised some interesting, but as yet unanswered, questions. Why
do a few economies have high levels of both HDI and TEA, and why do rather
more economies have high levels of HDI and low levels of TEA? Could it bebecause higher levels of human development potentially mean more rewarding
employment opportunities, thereby reducing the attraction of entrepreneurship as
a career choice?

•

The global pandemic had a mixed effect on entrepreneurship across theworld. Again, we looked at the 38 economies that participated in GEM research inboth 2019 and 2022. Discounting small (less than one percentage point) changes,
there are 12 economies in which the level of TEA was higher in 2022 than in 2019,
and 16 economies in which TEA levels fell. It is difficult to draw out commonalities,
since all regions and income levels are represented in each group.

•

New entrepreneurs frequently declare that they take social andenvironmental implications into account when making strategic decisions
about the future of their business. Notwithstanding the potential for social
desirability bias, it is nevertheless significant that more than half of new
entrepreneurs declare that they always take social implications into accountin every participating economy (with the exception of Norway, interestingly).
A majority of new business entrepreneurs also declared taking environmental
implications into account in every economy but two (Oman and Israel).
Conversely, more than four out of five took social implications into account in

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report1719 of the 49 economies, and in 21 of the 49 economies for environmental. Hence
there is room for optimism about the positive social and environmental impactsof these future businesses.
•

Job creation expectations of those starting new businesses declined
somewhat during the pandemic. Of the 32 economies participating in the APS ineach year from 2019–2022, there are 13 in which the percentage of those starting a
new business and expecting to employ no additional people fell (most notably in
Poland, Brazil and the Republic of Korea), but another 19 in which that proportion
increased (most notably in the Slovak Republic, Germany and Switzerland). The
differentiating characteristic may have been the inclination of people in somecountries to start a business just to generate an income during times of hardship.

•

In 2022, men were more likely than women to start a new business. Of the 49
economies participating in the APS, there were just four in which the level of female
new entrepreneurial activity exceeded that of men: Togo, Indonesia, Qatar andPoland, representing the three income levels used by GEM to categorize economies.
However, one trend that may have been accelerated by the pandemic could be thespread of greater entrepreneurial gender equity beyond just low-income economies.
Of the 38 economies participating in GEM in both 2019 and 2022, there were 21 inwhich the relative gender gap had decreased, just four of which were Level C.

THE FIVE BEST ECONOMIES IN WHICH TO START A BUSINESS

According to the GEM 2022 National Entrepreneurship Context Index

5 The Netherlands

4 India

3 Taiwan

1 United Arab Emirates
2 Saudi Arabia

Source: GEM National Expert Survey 2022

18

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report•Younger people are still more likely than older people to be starting new
businesses. The Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) rate of the 18–34
age group exceeded that of the 35–64 age group in 37 of the 49 economies in the
GEM APS. This gives a distinct entrepreneurial advantage to societies with younger
populations, and an entrepreneurial disadvantage to those with more ageing
populations, such as many economies in northern Europe.

•

The lowest business exit (and TEA) rates are within Europe and the highest
business exit (and TEA) rates are in Latin and North America, and in the Gulf.
Of the 49 GEM APS economies, every European economy had a business exit rate ofless than 6% and a TEA rate of less than 15%. Every economy outside Europe had
either an exit rate greater than 6% or a TEA rate of more than 15%. Most had both.
This may point to differences in entrepreneurial culture between Europe and therest of the world.

•

The proportion of business exits attributed to the pandemic is declining
rapidly, indicating the end to at least some of the direct economic hardshipit has caused. In 2020, COVID-19 was cited as a reason for less than one in fivebusiness exits in just 10 economies. In 2022 this had grown to 22 economies.

•

While high income is a helpful contributory factor, it does not in itself assurea high-quality entrepreneurial environment. For the GEM NES survey, thequality of a national entrepreneurial environment is assessed by national experts
from that economy against 13 Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions. In 2022,
three Level C economies — India, China and Indonesia — had nine or more of these
conditions scored as sufficient. Only seven of the 22 participating Level A economies
either matched or improved on this assessment. Two Level A economies, Spain and
Italy, had three or fewer conditions rated as sufficient. However, high-income United
Arab Emirates was, for the second year in succession, rated as the best place to starta new business.

CONCLUSIONSAt the end of the day, entrepreneurship matters and it matters greatly. That is why GEM
brings important annual research findings to the attention of policymakers worldwide.
Entrepreneurship brings jobs and incomes, turns ideas into new goods and services,hastens structural change and improves lives. Certainly, most governments have longlists of issues and projects competing for their attention and resources. However, few
propositions have the transformative power of new businesses, with entrepreneurs
at their helm helping to build a more prosperous, inclusive, and socially andenvironmentally conscious future along with undeniable commercial benefits. While
there is no doubt that the road to economic recovery and sustainability is currently a
Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report19

rocky one, successful entrepreneurship can drive economic recovery, help to create
innovative business models (which, for example, mitigate the impacts of current higher
energy costs), offer new ways to live, work and consume, and can fulfil the ambitions ofcreative, optimistic and determined people.

REPORT FORMATPart 1 of this GEM 2022/2023 Global Report presents a brief analysis of the 2022 APS
results, looking across results in 49 participating economies to identify commonalties
and differences. Consistency in the GEM APS questions and in the derivation of key
variables allows comparisons between economies in 2022 and, as importantly, in theevolution of those variables over time. Exploring how the global COVID-19 pandemic
impacted entrepreneurial variables by comparing results since 2020 is an obvious,
highly practical and useful application of GEM research. Not surprisingly, many key
entrepreneurial variables fell with the onset of the pandemic. Results for 2022 show thatrecovery from the direct economic impacts of that pandemic has been highly variable
across economies, and that many countries are still suffering. The 2022 GEM results
also offer a glimpse of the initial entrepreneurial effects of the war in Ukraine andsubsequent changes in prices, particularly for energy.
Part 2 mainly focuses on the entrepreneurial environment, or context, in which anindividual decides to pursue entrepreneurship through the NES findings. As such, it
provides food for thought not only for policymakers but also entrepreneurs thinking ofcreating new businesses with global growth potential and seeking the most conducive
environment to do so. These assessments are used by GEM researchers to calculate
a single figure representing the overall quality of the economy’s entrepreneurial
environment: the National Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI); and the final ranking
is also presented in this part of the report.
Following this, the reader will find a full series of individual national economy
profiles, presenting key entrepreneurial activity data and summarizing that economy’s
Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions, alongside a brief Policy Roadmap, identifying
key entrepreneurial strengths and weaknesses.
Finally this 2022/2203 GEM Global Report concludes with a useful Appendix forresearchers, which tabulates entrepreneurial variables across the participating
economies in 2022.

20

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportKey Thoughts for
Policymakers from the
GEM 2022/2023 Global
Report Authors
It is difficult to make informed decisions without having the right data. GEM fills thisvoid for policymakers. GEM is the only global research source that collects data on
entrepreneurship directly from the source — entrepreneurs! Policymakers can takeaction based on GEM data to help their respective entrepreneurial ecosystems to thrive.
Based on this year’s research, the GEM 2022/2023 Global Report authorship team sharedsome key insights for policymakers.

“In the midst of turbulence and uncertainty, policy focused on innovation
becomes a priority for recovery and growth. It is a solution for better
competitiveness and development by bringing the economy to a better
quantitative and qualitative level, creating added value, quality jobs andstrengthening human capital. Policymakers have more interest than everin pivoting to new holistic paradigms of intervention, abandoning thosethat crises have made obsolete. This prevents missed opportunities that bydefinition multiply after crises and, of course, to address issues related topopulation anchoring and regional inequalities in order to foster a morecohesive, inclusive and sustainable entrepreneurship.”
Fatima Boutaleb, PhD, Hassan II University of Casablanca, GEM Morocco“The economic recovery in many countries following the COVID-19 pandemic
has been complicated by the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. Governments have
implemented measures to promote entrepreneurial activity, but these efforts
have been hindered by inflation, fluctuations in the stock and financial
markets, and difficulties in managing funds. As a result, starting andmaintaining a business has become a challenge for many due to high costs andlimited demand. Policymakers will need to be innovative in order to overcome
these challenges and support entrepreneurship in 2023.”
Alicia Coduras, PhD, GEM Global and GEM Saudi Arabia

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

21

“The GEM Global Report provides a unique window into this turbulent anddynamic world of entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurs take multiple risks todirectly and indirectly impact society. In economic terms, new entrepreneurs
create jobs, translate ideas into products and services, introduce technologies,
stimulate market competitiveness, generate income and add value in domestic
and international markets. In social terms, new entrepreneurs tackle societal
issues in their value-creation process and business models. This year’s GEM
Report motivates us to re-legitimize entrepreneurs’ socio-economic impacts
and rethink public policy instruments for enhancing entrepreneurs’ impacts.”
Maribel Guerrero, PhD, Arizona State University, USA, andUniversidad del Desarrollo, Chile; GEM Chile“Year after year, entrepreneurial education at school is consistently rated worstof all Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions. With a small number of notable
exceptions, most countries are foregoing the opportunity to add to theirentrepreneurial potential. The costs of this failure will reverberate throughdecades of new starts that never happened, simply because many people were
just not aware.”
Stephen Hill, DSc, Lead Author of the GEM 2022/2023 Global Report“GEM national experts score against 13 Framework Conditions that leadto the country ranking in GEM’s National Entrepreneurship Context Index(NECI). This provides policymakers with a ‘how to’ guide on fostering
entrepreneurship within their specific national context. With this in mind, I
strongly encourage you to review the Economy Profiles within this report. They
highlight the 13 framework scores behind each participating economy’s NECI
ranking. Just a few examples in 2022: Entrepreneurial Education Post-School
increased dramatically in Switzerland; Taiwan ranked first for three conditions(Government Policy: Taxes and Bureaucracy, Commercial and Professional
Infrastructure, and Physical Infrastructure); and Morocco improved in almost
all of the 13 framework scores. The wealth of knowledge behind these profiles
can be used to support more effective strategic decision-making and robust
policies for promotion of entrepreneurship in your own context.”
Aileen Ionescu-Somers, PhD, GEM Executive Director“Over GEM’s 24-year existence, hundreds of policy recommendations on
innovation and entrepreneurship have been made nationally and globallyin GEM reports by top-level GEM scientists. Policymakers can turn GEM
recommendations into policies and directives at national, regional and local
levels, implement them effectively and efficiently, and then monitor andmeasure their impact on the innovation and entrepreneurship ecosystem. I
invite policymakers to reflect on our main GEM findings, summarized in Part
2 of this report, related to National Contexts and Economy Profiles. We cancollaborate to focus on achieving great beneficial impact for society from
GEM’s mammoth multi-year scientific endeavour.”Prof. Emeritus Ehud Menipaz, Ben Gurion University; GEM Israel

22

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

“The impact of COVID-19 on entrepreneurial activity has been highly variable,
evidenced from our comparison over the 2019–2022 period. After excluding
countries with changes of less than one percentage point, 12 economies saw
an increase in entrepreneurial activity, while 16 saw a decrease. Preliminary
evidence suggests differences in the entrepreneurial ecosystem and support
offered to entrepreneurs during the pandemic as potential reasons for thedivergent trends.”
Sreevas Sahasranamam, PhD, University ofStrathclyde, Glasgow; GEM UK“The diversity of human values that bring people to start a business isstriking. Policymakers need to understand these motivations. Some people
start a business because they value making a difference in the world.
Others long to continue a family tradition of running businesses. There areindividuals motivated to accumulate wealth. Then there are some who resort
to entrepreneurship because jobs are difficult to find. Despite this diversityof motives, entrepreneurs form a kind of community, united by their mutualawareness, networking and aspirations. The GEM Global Report provides
clarity to these and other important aspects that help define the strengths andweaknesses of an economy’s entrepreneurial ecosystem.”Thomas Schøtt, PhD, University of Agder, Norway“Entrepreneurial action continues to be constrained by fear of failure, despitehigh self-confidence, encouraging perceptions of startup opportunities
and belief that starting a business is easy. Access to educational programs
specifically focused on risk assessment and mitigation coupled with policies
that reduce the perceived personal costs of failure could unleash a significant,and pent-up, wave of entrepreneurial activity.”
Jeffrey P. Shay, PhD, Babson College, Professor of
Entrepreneurship, Entrepreneurship Division; GEM USA“In 2022, we have again witnessed disparities between genders, age groups
and levels of education. In some countries, only one in five businesses is
owned by a woman, while in others, three-quarters of new businesses arestarted by individuals under the age of 35. These gaps highlight areas for
improvement and should be a focus for policymakers seeking to support thesuccess of future entrepreneurs.”
Przemysław Zbierowski, PhD, Associate Professor,
University of Economics in Katowice; GEM Poland

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report23Collaborate with GEM to assess
city and regional readinessfor entrepreneurship
What makes a city or region attractive toentrepreneurs? Which factors draw creative
entrepreneurs to a city or region … indeed,
to any entrepreneurial ecosystem? What
gives them the confidence that they canbuild successful, value-adding and profitablecompanies in a nurturing context? How
good are cities and regions at building thesecontexts and nurturing entrepreneurship?
Collaborate with GEM to find answers tothese questions in cities and regions thatare important to you! Our Entrepreneurial
Ecosystem Quality Composite Index (ESI)
is a diagnostic tool that provides frameworks
and data to analyse just about any subnational
ecosystem. ESI reports have been conductedin several ecosystems around the world.

“The GEM ESI methodology provided
a valuable contribution to deepen our
knowledge of Madrid’s entrepreneurial
ecosystem. It is a solid scientific approach andoffers the possibility to analyse a number ofvariables aligned to different key pillars. This
enabled us to identify how the main actors
interact and the key issues to be addressed tofoster ecosystem development. The ESI tool isa great input for diagnosis and policymaking.”—Isidro de Pablo López,Universidad Autónoma de Madrid“Reporting on the findings from the Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor’s Entrepreneurial
Ecosystem Quality Index in our regionof Nova Scotia, Canada, generated asignificant amount of interest frompolicymakers and ecosystem actors. Someof the notable findings, based on our data,
have informed debate and helped leading
ecosystem players to think about strategies
for further ecosystem development.”—Kevin McKague, PhD,
Canada Research Chair and Associate
Professor of Entrepreneurship, Shannon
School of Business, Cape Breton University

For more information, visit www.gemconsortium.org or write info@gemconsortium.org

PART 1Analysis

1

What Is GEM?

Stephen Hill and Aileen Ionescu-Somers

1.1 BRIEF INTRODUCTION
The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) is along-term collaborative research initiative whichaims to measure and monitor entrepreneurship.
GEM was started in 1999 by forward-thinking
academics at its founding organizations: Babson
College in Boston, USA, and London Business

School in the UK. This collaboration quickly grewfrom a handful of economies to what is today themost extensive and longest-running global studyof entrepreneurship. This 24th annual GEM Global
Report draws on extensive survey results from 51
economies across the world.

1.2 THE GLOBAL CONTEXTStarting a new business is never easy, even when
all the requisite stars align — i.e. confidence isup, the business context is ideal and incomesare growing. Last year’s GEM Global Report1 wascautiously optimistic that the global economy
would begin its recovery from the impact of
the COVID-19 pandemic, despite supply-side
issues and some rising costs. However, such
optimism proved short-lived. Russian tanks
rolled into Ukraine in February 2022, sparking
not only conflict and destruction but a slew
of international sanctions and unprecedented
energy price rises. This had the further negative
effect of lifting household and business costs
to dizzying heights, prompting governmentswith sufficient resources to reintroduce support
packages on a scale that easily matched those of
the pandemic, further increasing national debt
burdens worldwide. Longer-term impacts include
an increase in the costs of energy-intensive
products and services, and strong incentives tominimize the use of fossil fuels.
Because of these developments, many of
those starting a business in 2022 face possibly

the most difficult business environment since the
GEM project began in 1999. Starting a businessis always a triumph of hope over circumstance;starting that business in 2022 required a hefty
dose of optimism.
Because of the global pandemic, recent GEM
Global Reports have addressed questions suchas whether some entrepreneurs find opportunity
amid disruption, and how entrepreneurs havebeen leveraging these opportunities. Moreover,while steeply rising energy prices represent asignificant burden for energy users, they can bea windfall to energy producers. Similarly, energyexporting economies and their governments havemade unanticipated gains and have enjoyedan influx of foreign currency. Such a pattern ofgains and losses inevitably has its effects onhousehold incomes and business costs, reducing
real incomes and increasing costs in energyimporting economies. Of course, even in those
adversely affected economies, crisis and change
always bring opportunities. And entrepreneurs
have proved themselves to be particularly adept at
grasping opportunities.

1 GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor) (2022). Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor 2021/2022 Global Report:
Opportunity Amid Disruption. London: GEM. https://www.gemconsortium.org/reports/latest-global-report

26

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Claudia Isabel Barona
Co-founder of Lifepack (Colombia)

Optimism in responding to disruption“An entrepreneur is passionate, a dreamer,
creative, optimistic and has confidence tobring one’s ideas to fruition.”
These are the words of Claudia Isabel Barona,co-founder of Lifepack, a Colombian-based
company that produces 100% biodegradable
ecological products made from natural fibres
and seeds. Lifepack relies on an environmentally
sustainable business model and is supported byNGOs, government entities and universities, among
others.
This optimism has been on display throughout her
entrepreneurial journey, especially over the past few
years.
Lifepack has evolved in response to COVID-19. Before
COVID, business was primarily conducted face toface. But, as sales channels changed due to thepandemic, Lifepack adapted; now over 70% of its
transactions are digital.
Lifepack used the disruptions caused by the
pandemic as an opportunity to improve internal
operational and production processes, somethingthat had not been done since the company’s
founding in 2014.
“We had the opportunity to explore otherfibres (agro-industrial residues/agriculturalresidues) in our production process andto expand our lines of business, further
encouraging the circular economy.”

As a result, new lines of business were born including
a technology transfer programme. The company
sell its knowledge in implementing the production
process in other regions and countries.
In 2022, Lifepack has needed to operate in theface of inflation that has doubled the prices of raw
materials. This inflation is reflected in the company’s
selling prices, but has resulted in lower sales due tothe lack of purchasing power of the peso. This reality
doesn’t deter Claudia. She concluded:“The entrepreneur identifies opportunities
that arise from the environment and creates
innovative solutions with global and social
well-being in mind.”

1.3 WHY ENTREPRENEURSHIP MATTERS
There are many reasons why entrepreneurshipis important, and why increasing levels ofentrepreneurship can indicate a vibrant, dynamic
economy. Again, entrepreneurship is defined by
GEM as the act of starting and running a new
business. In other words, it is the act itself thatis important. Merely thinking about startinga business, or intending to do so even in thenear future, does not meet this requirement.
To be considered an entrepreneur by GEM, an
individual must have acted. This can include
spending time and funding in seeking to get abusiness off the ground.
New businesses created by entrepreneursdeliver jobs, incomes and value-added — the threecornerstones of economic development — often

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

27

FIGURE 1.1 ​The GEM Conceptual
Frameworkby introducing new products, technologies orprocesses. In doing so, new businesses launchedby entrepreneurs can also accelerate structuralchange. They can speed up the shift of resourcesaway from things people no longer want or wish
to pay for, towards things they want or for which
the entrepreneur perceives a gap in the market
or can create a need. Hence a dynamic economy
needs a steady stream of new and innovative
businesses, replenishing the overall stock ofbusinesses and firms and transforming ideas into
new goods and services. Of course, not all new
businesses engender growth; a new coffee shop
concept, for example, if it better serves the needsof consumers, may in fact hasten the decline ofexisting providers, since, in some economies atleast, consumers are unlikely to drink more coffee.
But even this displacement is significant, since
it is the market that ultimately dictates whether
a new coffee shop concept is more economicallysustainable than those that already exist.
Evidently, not all new businesses succeed;
many fail. Hence, some resources expended instarting that business may be lost. Yet, even inthese cases, it is important to bear in mind that
not everything is lost. Learning from previous
failure may provide the entrepreneur and otherstakeholders with knowledge and experience thatcan prove vital to future business success. Failure
also tests resolution and determination, importantcharacteristics of successful entrepreneurs.

If the level of entrepreneurship in any given
economy is important, then defining andmeasuring that level must also be important.
If comparisons are to be made, both between
economies and of the same economy over time,then it is crucial that entrepreneurship is definedand measured in a manner that is both precise
and consistent over time. It is this precision andconsistency that has been, and is today, the real
strength of GEM. For example, the GEM database,stretching back more than two decades, canshed light on the details of historical rises andfalls in levels of entrepreneurship in a particular
economy. This continuity and consistency
allows comparisons to be made, so that like may
always be compared to like. Similarly, the level ofentrepreneurship in one economy in a given year
can be compared to the level in another, because
both are defined and measured in exactly thesame way year on year.
The act of starting a new business is theresult of a highly individual and personal
decision-making process. This process reflects
an individual’s attitudes as well as personal
attributes such as knowledge, experience,values and motivation, alongside their accessto resources. Furthermore, this act takes place
within a context of social values that may promoteor hinder entrepreneurship, and in a locality(termed the entrepreneurial ecosystem) thatcan facilitate or constrain access to resources.

OUTCOME(socio-economic development)

Social, cultural, political,
economic context
National
Framework
Conditions

Entrepreneurial
Framework
Conditions

ENTREPRENEURIAL OUTPUT(new jobs, new value added)

SOCIETAL VALUES ABOUTENTREPRENEURSHIP

Basic requirements
Efficiency enhancers
Innovation and businesssophistication

INDIVIDUAL ATTRIBUTES(self-perceptions anddemographics)

ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY◆ BY PHASE
Nascent, new, established,business exits◆ BY IMPACT
High growth, innovative,
market scope◆ BY TYPE
TEA, EBO, EEA

28

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

GEM keeps its finger on the pulse of all these
aspects of entrepreneurial activity across theentrepreneurial community: they are exploredin more detail in later chapters of this report. To
illustrate the structure and components of GEM
research, Figure 1.1 presents the GEM Conceptual
Framework.
An entrepreneur’s social environment may
also, for example, encourage or discouragerisk-taking, or may value collective endeavour
over individual achievement. This, too, caninfluence access to resources, including bothexpertise and capital. It may determine otheraspects of the new business, including choice ofsector, levels of innovation and scale of ambition.
These factors in turn greatly influence the impactsof any new business in terms of jobs generated,
income levels and economic value-added.

1.4 THE GEM METHODOLOGYAt the heart of GEM research are twocomplementary core surveys. The first is the
Adult Population Survey (APS), which isadministered to a structured random sample
of at least 2,000 adults (aged 18–64) in eachparticipating economy, and often more in larger
or more complex national economies. The
national sample is structured to reflect the overall
population in terms of age, gender and location:so, for example, if 20% of adults in a particular
economy are aged 18–34, then 20% of sampled
adults will be in that age group. The APS provides
detailed information on the characteristics ofentrepreneurial individuals, their activities,
attitudes, motivations and ambitions. It also
allows for exploration of the entrepreneur’s active
involvement in starting or running a new businessat different stages of development, whether
nascent, established, high-growth, etc. Exactly thesame questions are asked in each participating
economy, either by face-to-face or telephoneinterview, occasionally by online survey, withcareful attention to accurate translation into themany different national languages required. It
is primarily the consistency of these questions,and the manner in which results are verified
and used to estimate key variables, that enables
comparison within and between economies overtime.
By surveying the activities and perceptionsof individuals, GEM research offers insights into
the personal decision-making process involvedin starting a business, and the subsequentdevelopment of that business, in a way that
official business statistics, such as the number ofregistered businesses, simply cannot. In addition,
because of the APS’s focus on individuals andits anonymization of results, it reflects activity
in the informal or unregistered economy —which is normally beyond the reach of mostofficial statistics. This is especially important inmany developing countries, where unregisteredbusinesses may represent a significant proportionof the total stock, and where many new
businesses never mature to the point of being
formally registered. In 2022, more than 173,000
people completed the GEM APS interview, adding
to an existing GEM database of over 3 million
respondents across 120 economies since the first
APS survey in 1999.
While maintaining continuity and consistency
in the APS questions is fundamental, this does
not prevent GEM from responding to changing
circumstances and priorities. In recent years,
the COVID-19 pandemic has cast a deep shadow
over national and international economies, andGEM has responded with new and additionalquestions that have allowed some of the impactsof that pandemic to be assessed.2 The pandemic
has hastened changes in the ways that people
work and live, with less commuting, more online
shopping, and a steady drift away from city
centres, shopping malls and retail parks as the
focal points of consumer activity. Rising energy
prices provide a new impetus to more sustainableproduction and consumption, important partsof the United Nations Sustainable Development
Goals (SDGs).3 Other SDGs, such as reducing
poverty and promoting inclusion, may havebecome more difficult to achieve, given risinghousehold and business costs.

2 See GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor) (2020).
Diagnosing COVID-19 Impacts on Entrepreneurship:
Exploring Policy Remedies for Recovery. London:
GEM. http://www.gemconsortium.org/reports/
covid-impact-report
3 The 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) —adopted by all United Nations Member States in2015 as part of the United Nations 2030 Agenda for
Sustainable Development — are an urgent call for
action by all countries to help achieve these goals by
2030 (https://sdgs.un.org/goals).

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report29

In 2021, GEM introduced new questionsin the APS related to the role that social andenvironmental considerations play in thelong-term decision-making of entrepreneurs
in relation to new businesses. These questions
are repeated in the 2022 APS (thereby allowing
comparisons to be made), but also extended
by new questions about awareness of the UN
SDGs and whether these play a part in businesspriorities and strategies.
The volume of data collected by the APS allows
key variables to be estimated and comparedwith confidence.4 These key variables can thenbe used to profile and track the entrepreneurial
process: from having an initial business idea andperceiving related opportunities (conception),to starting a business and beginning to pursue
those opportunities (nascent entrepreneurship),to transitioning the new startup into an
established business, or in some cases towards

FIGURE 1.2 ​The entrepreneurial
process and GEM
indicators

4 Including tests of statistical significance and theestimation of confidence interval. These are notincluded in this Global Report for reasons of brevity.

a business exit. These entrepreneurial processes
are presented in Figure 1.2, which also offers aguide to some important GEM definitions andmeasurements.
GEM distinguishes between three distinct
stages in the development of entrepreneurial
activity and therefore defines a related typology
for entrepreneurs in each stage. The Nascent
Entrepreneur has actively devoted resources tostarting the business but the business has not yet
paid wages or salaries (including to themselves)for a period of three months. The New Business
Owner has started and is running a business andhas paid wages or salaries for three months or
more, but for less than 42 months, because thoserunning a business and paying wages or salaries
for 42 months or more are classed as Established
Business Owners.
A healthy and vibrant economy would haveenough entrepreneurs operating at each stage ofenterprise development to ensure that there is aconstant throughput of potential established andhigh-growth businesses. Low levels of Nascent
Entrepreneurs may indicate significant barriers to

EXITINGTHE BUSINESSTOTAL EARLY-STAGE
ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY (TEA)
NASCENTENTREPRENEUR:
involved in setting
up a business

POTENTIAL
ENTREPRENEUR:
opportunities, capabilities and intentions

CONCEPTIONOWNER-MANAGER
OF A NEW
BUSINESS(up to 3.5 years)

FIRM BIRTHOWNER-MANAGER
OF AN ESTABLISHED
more than
3.5 years)

PERSISTENCEEARLY-STAGE ENTREPRENEURSHIP PROFILEINDIVIDUAL ATTRIBUTES• Gender• Age• Motivation

30

IMPACT• Business growth• Innovation• Market scope• Industry

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Anna Niszkács
Owner and Managing Director of Gerbeaud
Gasztronómia Kft. (Hungary)Innovating in the midst of global disruption
Taking over a reputable family business in the
midst of a pandemic is no small undertaking. Just
ask Anna Niszkács, owner of Gerbeaud, one of
the best-known Hungarian confectionery brands.
Begun in 1858 as a stand-alone café, the Gerbeaudgroup now includes multiple restaurants and otherhospitality services.
Prior to 2020, Gerbeaud had never needed to
shut down because of a global pandemic in its
over 160 years of operation. Anna, however, hasexperienced a different reality ever since she took
over in February of that year. Essentially, she only
knows what it is like to own and manage a businessthat is operating in the midst of disruption due
to global events. Once the pandemic emerged in
March 2020, all the thriving business’s units had
to close and Gerbeaud lost over 90% of its revenue
overnight. Difficult as these circumstances were,Anna used them as an opportunity to innovate.
“The COVID-19 pandemic has been an
important multiplier for us and provided
us with the opportunity to rethink ourwell-established brands. During times ofpeace and normalcy, leaders are reluctant torethink their successful products.”
An example is the Gerbeaud-owned restaurant
Onyx, which opened in 2007 as a pioneer in finedining and had received two Michelin stars before
the pandemic closed it down. The company took
this as an opportunity to launch a large-scale
professional development program.
Another of the company’s units — Émile, arestaurant located in the residential area of
Budapest — launched a home delivery service outof necessity shortly after being obliged to terminate
in-person dining. When on-site service became
possible again in June 2021, Émile was able toimprove on previous years’ results thanks to its newdelivery service. Just as the extreme pandemicrelated disruptions were subsiding, Anna has been
forced to lead Gerbeaud through another global
disruption: the outbreak of the war in Ukraine (aneighbour of Hungary).
“I now see that the handling of the pandemic
was an opportunity to prepare for the war
between Russia and Ukraine, inflation and therise in energy prices. COVID-19 was a disasterfor companies in the hospitality sector — weare focusing on stabilizing the business. But
this does not mean we’re staying the same.
Rather, we are looking to the future andinnovating even more boldly.”Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report31new business development, while having too few
Established Business Owners may suggest that notenough new businesses are surviving into maturity.
On the other hand, it may also point to a dearth ofinnovation and new ideas, or may suggest somebarriers to the sustainable entry of new firms,
restricting competition and consumer choice.
The most important GEM variable is the level of
Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA),
or the proportion of the adult population that isstarting or running a new business (including
both Nascent Entrepreneurs and New Business
Owners).5
The second GEM survey is the National Expert
Survey (NES). Each year every GEM National Team
invites at least 36 identified national experts6 tocomplete an online survey in which they each
assess a number of carefully defined statements
relating to their economy’s entrepreneurial
framework conditions. These conditions range
from the availability of entrepreneurial financeto the quality and affordability of physicalinfrastructure, and from government policies
to encourage entrepreneurship to the social
support for that entrepreneurship. These
assessments are used to judge the quality of thecontext for entrepreneurship in each economy
and to calculate a National Entrepreneurship
Context Index (NECI), which allows the rankingof economies in terms of their support andencouragement for entrepreneurship. This isuseful to entrepreneurs since it answers a key
question: where are the best places to start a new

business? It is also useful to policymakers, since
not only do they get feedback on the relative
conduciveness of their national business context
to promote entrepreneurship but the results of thestudy also enable benchmarking against othernational contexts.
New NES questions in 2022 focus on the paceof recovery post-pandemic and the awareness,
application and prioritization of the SDGs.
Together, the APS and NES present, for eacheconomy, a unique, comprehensive and detailed
annual snapshot of national entrepreneurial
activity, and of the attitudes, experiences,
activities and ambitions of the entrepreneurs
themselves. The APS study also delivers an
in-depth and evidenced account of the values,
ambitions and intentions of the majority of adults
in each economy who are not, at the moment,
starting or running a business, even if many know
someone who is.
The data that GEM collects in relation tobusiness exit is also significant, since by exiting
businesses entrepreneurs release resources,
including knowledge and experience, into thewider business context. Many of the businesses
that individuals exit continue in some formor another, so exit does not necessarily mean
business closure. Finally, some of those notstarting a new business may nonetheless beinvesting resources, usually funding, in someone
else’s new business. This informal type ofinvestment is especially important in some
economies, and will also be considered later.

1.5 GEM 2022 PARTICIPATING ECONOMIESTo present the data analysis in the 2021 GEM
Global Report, participating economies weresolely categorized by income, using World Bank
data on Gross Domestic Product per capita (GDP/cap), but introducing, for the first time, GEM’s
own definitions of low, medium and high income.
These categories have been retained this year,
and are set out below. The boundaries between
categories are, of course, arbitrary, and have beenchosen to give three (reasonably) even groups
and to be consistent with last year. However, it
should be noted that rising incomes mean that anincreasing proportion of participating economies

5 To avoid double-counting, minus the very few who are
doing both.

32

find themselves in the high-income group. For
this reason, in future reports the boundaries will
require upward revision.
• Level A: economies with a GDP/cap of over
$40,000;• Level B: economies with a GDP/cap of
between $20,000 and $40,000;• Level C: economies with a GDP/cap of lessthan $20,000.

6 That expertise may be in entrepreneurship, on theeconomy, on access to finance, etc. The individual
expert can be from a wide variety of specialities: an
academic, a financial journalist, a venture capitalist,
etc. Each team utilizes a range of experts.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Level A>$40,000

Level B
$20,000–$40,000

Level C<$20,000Austria
CanadaCyprusFranceGermany
IsraelItaly
Japan
Lithuania
Luxembourg
Netherlands
NorwayQatar
Republic of Korea
Saudi Arabia
Slovenia
Spain
SwedenSwitzerland
United Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
United States

Argentina
Chile
Croatia
GreeceHungary
LatviaMexicoOman
PanamaPolandPuerto Rico
Romania
SerbiaSlovak Republic
TaiwanUruguay

BrazilChina
Colombia
Egypt
GuatemalaIndia
Indonesia
Iran
MoroccoSouth Africa
Togo
Tunisia
Venezuela

Table 1.1 lists the economies participating in
GEM in 2022, divided into these three categories,
using World Bank data.7 These are the categories
that will be used in presenting results, analyses
and conclusions throughout this report.
All the economies listed participated in both
the APS and NES, with the exception of Italy andArgentina, both of which participated solely in the
NES. Having 51 GEM participating economies is aconsiderable achievement given current turbulent
times. It is also a strong testament to the tenacityof GEM National Teams and their belief in the
GEM project, as well as to the support of theirsponsoring bodies, most often policymakers andentities that perceive entrepreneurship as partand parcel of the solution to the current global
economic challenges.
The combined total population of these51 economies represent more than 64% of
the global population.8 Level A includes 14
European economies, two in North America,
three Gulf States plus Japan, the Republic ofKorea and Israel. Level B economies are mostly
from Latin America or Eastern Europe, plus
Taiwan and Oman, while Level C economies are
more widely spread, from Latin America, theMiddle East, East Asia and Africa. None are from
Europe, despite European economies comprisingnearly a half of the 2022 GEM-participating
economies.

7 World Bank data for GDP/cap (and population) was
accessed on 24 October 2022, giving estimates for 2021
(those for Iran and United Arab Emirates were for2020). World Bank data may have been revised sincethen. Taiwan is absent from World Bank data, so an
IMF estimate has been used instead. See https://data.
worldbank.org and https://www.imf.org/en/Home.

8 Estimated using World Bank data.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

TABLE 1.1 ​Economies in GEM
2022, categorized
by income group(GDP/cap)33

1.6 THE IMPACT OF THE PANDEMIC ON HOUSEHOLDINCOMESFIGURE 1.3 ​The impact ofthe pandemic onhousehold income

Household income is an important, and broad,measure of the pandemic’s impact. In 2020 and
2021, a question in the APS asked individuals
whether, for each of those years, the pandemic
had led “your household income to strongly
decrease, to somewhat decrease, to show nosubstantial change, to somewhat increase, or toincrease strongly”. This question was repeated in
2022.
Figure 1.3 shows that the economic impacts ofthe pandemic were far from over in 2022. As in
the previous two Global Reports, the pandemic
continues to hit those hardest who could afford
it least, with the highest proportions of adults

reporting a decrease in household income in thepoorest economies, with the lowest proportions in
the richest — although with considerable variation
between countries. In Level C economies, theshare of adults still reporting a decrease inhousehold income due to the pandemic ranged
from almost nine out of 10 in Togo to just a halfin Iran; in Level B the range was from three outof four in Mexico to one in five in Croatia, and in
Level A economies from two out of three in the
United Arab Emirates to less than one in 10 in
Norway. This high variation in impact may reflect
a number of factors, such as the wide diversity of
approaches to managing the pandemic, different

Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Strongly decrease

Somewhat decrease

Strongly increase

Somewhat increase

50
40
30
20

% of adults 18–64

10
0
−10
−20
−30
−40
−50
−60
−70

−90

Togo
Venezuela
Indonesia
India
China
Colombia
Egypt
Tunisia
MoroccoGuatemalaSouth Africa
BrazilIran
MexicoPanamaPolandGreeceUruguay
Slovak Republic
Puerto Rico
Chile
SerbiaOman
TaiwanRomania
Hungary
LatviaCroatia
United Arab Emirates
Saudi Arabia
Cyprus
Qatar
Spain
IsraelRepublic of Korea
CanadaUnited States
FranceAustria
Germany
Lithuania
Luxembourg
United Kingdom
Japan
Slovenia
Netherlands
Switzerland
SwedenNorway−80

Level C

34

Level B

Level A

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Maxwell Peng
Founder of VMFi (Taiwan)

The power of pivoting
Maxwell Peng, an entrepreneur based in Taipei,
was passionate about bringing innovation to thein-person event space when he launched VMFi in
2020. The company’s 5G Blazing Fast AI Speech
Translation System encourages multi-language
visitors to attend the same event. Backed by
5G and AI technology, the scalable speechtranslation turnkey solution reduces dependence
on costly interpreters and radio technology
during face-to-face meetings, conferences andexhibitions.
As the pandemic halted all in-person gatherings,
Maxwell knew he needed to pivot and create adigital solution:“The pandemic pushed VMFi to evolve speechtranslation services from offline only to online.
We evolved to offer speech translation services
for any offline event and online webinar at thesame time.”
In addition to addressing concerns around COVID-19,
the product also addresses a challenge faced bythose with hearing impairments:“We show both captions and subtitles. Thiscan prevent overseas travellers and local
staff both from COVID-19 infection, providing
security without a language barrier. Ourservice can be deployed at any location in theworld via wireless broadband service.”
As VMFi moves into the future, Maxwell can always
look back to a time period when a global disruption
necessitated a successful pivot.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report35social and cultural factors affecting the reactionof populations, and, importantly, the willingness(and ability) of governments to introduce andsustain support packages for individuals andbusinesses.
Amongst these 49 economies, Croatia inparticular stands out, with the second lowest
proportion of adults reporting a decrease (just one
in five — only Norway had less), and almost one in
two adults even reporting an increase in income,by far the highest of the 49 economies. The next
highest were the United States and South Africa.
Although Figure 1.3 presents a relatively bleak
picture, there are some signs that it may be slowly
improving. A total of 37 economies participatedin the GEM APS in both 2022 and 2021, and so

answers to the same question in both years canbe compared for these economies. In 26 of those
37, the proportion of adults reporting that the
pandemic has decreased their household income
had fallen, the largest falls being in India (from
98% to 74%) and in Canada (46% to 34%). The
largest increases were in Germany (from 21% to32%) and in Romania (21% to 34%). However,more generally, while the totals reporting adecrease are still high, the numbers selecting“strongly decreases” have gone down, and thenumbers selecting “somewhat decreases” haverisen. This appears to indicate a sluggish shift
to recovery despite the overall gloom implied in
Figure 1.3.

1.7 CONCLUSION
While the economic and social impacts of the
global chaos created by the pandemic and the war
in Ukraine continue to reverberate throughout
the global economy, many of those impacts havebeen amplified by the ensuing supply-chaindifficulties and rapidly rising energy costs. In
these circumstances, to have so many economies
participating in the 2022 GEM research programis a considerable achievement. Credit is dueto those national teams that carried out the
research, sometimes under extremely difficult
circumstances. Four of those economies share aborder with Ukraine (Hungary, Romania, Poland
and the Slovak Republic). The picture of how
entrepreneurs are coping in these circumstances
will be developed in subsequent chapters.
For now, suffice it to note that, as in 2021,
the poorest economies continue to be worst
affected by the lingering impacts of the global
pandemic. The economic crisis stirred by the
war in Ukraine has not improved matters. The
consequences are significant, bearing in mind
that, before the pandemic struck, extreme poverty
rates had been steadily declining for over two
decades. The United Nations was confident about
achieving the eradication of extreme poverty, inline with one of the aforementioned SDGs. This36

positive trajectory promised great hope for the
future, but within a very short period has been
greatly jeopardized by the current volatility anduncertainty, again exacerbating inequalities.
In any case, while starting a new business willcontinue to be an option even in such challenging
economic contexts, there is a new wave ofentrepreneurs, often operating informally indeveloping economies, who now simply have toearn a living through entrepreneurship because
jobs are so scarce. However, these businesses
are most unlikely to transform into value-adding
growth-oriented businesses for those economies.
This year’s report presents analysis of largescale population survey results from 49 economies
across the globe. All continents are represented
in the participating economies except for theArctic, Antarctic and Australasia, although someare better represented than others. Nevertheless,the results presented in this report provide acomprehensive and timely overview of the leveland nature of early-stage entrepreneurship acrossthe world, and an informative guide to social
attitudes and perceptions of entrepreneurship,
together with a careful expert assessment of theentrepreneurial ecosystem in each participating
economy.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

The Social and Cultural
Foundations of
Entrepreneurship

2

Stephen Hill and Jeffrey Shay

2.1 THE INFLUENCE OF SOCIETY AND CULTURE
Starting a business can be considered very much apersonal choice. How entrepreneurship is viewed,
including whether it is seen as an attractive career
choice, depends in part on the social and culturalcontext of the individual. In the developed world,
it is very easy to assume that a common career
path is to go from school to college, then on toa full-time job with a good employer. In the lessdeveloped world, where earning a living may bemuch more difficult, working for yourself may
seem a necessity.
However, the role of social and cultural context
is not just about the stage of development. The
level of early-stage entrepreneurial activity varies
considerably, both within and between income
groups. For example, high-income economies
like Canada and Saudi Arabia consistently
have much greater levels of entrepreneurial
activity than equally high-income Germany and
Norway. Similarly, low-income Brazil and South
Africa typically have much higher levels than
low-income Morocco and Iran. These withinincome-level differences may reflect social mores
and cultural attitudes, such as how the collective
good is viewed compared to individual success,and how people and groups weigh risk against
reward.9
So attitudes and perceptions are not solely
intrinsic to the individual: they are shaped
and constructed by family and social values,
themselves reflecting tradition and culture. GEM

9 Sahasranamam, S., Nandakumar, M.K., Pereira, V.,& Temouri, Y. (2021). Knowledge capital in socialand commercial entrepreneurship: Investigating therole of informal institutions. Journal of International
Management, 27(1). doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
intman.2021.100833

assesses an economy’s social and economic
context in two important ways. The Adult
Population Survey (APS) asks all individual
participants a number of questions about theirattitudes, actions and intentions. Some of theresults of these questions will be considered
and assessed in this chapter. The second waythat an economy’s context is assessed is via
the National Expert Survey (NES), asking
national experts within that economy for theirjudgement of that economy’s environment
with regard to entrepreneurship, including
factors such as access to entrepreneurial
finance, educational programs to develop
entrepreneurship, and social support for thosestarting their own business. The results of the
NES are discussed in detail later in a separate
section (“The Context for Entrepreneurship”,
p. 105), but individual perceptions and nationalframework conditions for entrepreneurship areclearly interrelated.
Global and regional contexts will also influence
attitudes and perceptions. The pandemic haschanged, perhaps forever, the culture of using
digital technologies in accessing and delivering
information, products and services, and eveninfluenced new forms of collaboration, likeworking from home, online shopping, or fast fooddeliveries. These may be permanent shifts in theways that digital technologies are utilized and, inturn, perceived.
Meanwhile, economies and societies do
not stand still, so attitudes, expectations andintentions also evolve. This chapter discusses
some of these changes, including some
limited pre- and post-pandemic comparisons.
Opportunities need to be recognized before they
can be grasped, so the APS enquires about seeing

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report37

good opportunities to start a business locally, andwhether starting a business is easy.
Finally, investing in someone else’s new
business, known as informal investment, is an
important dimension of entrepreneurial activity

in some economies. This can be a crucial source offinance for new entrepreneurs in those economies.
This chapter will consider the proportion of adults
investing in someone else’s startup10 in 2022, andthe median level of investment for those that did.

2.2 THE RECOGNITION OF OPPORTUNITIESFIGURE 2.1 ​Knowing someone
who has started abusiness in the last
two years (% adults)

Before examining opportunity recognition
directly, there is another social and culturaldimension to consider. The perception ofentrepreneurship as a viable career choice may
well be influenced by whether the individual
personally knows someone who has recently
started a business. The answer to this question is
not just about the level of entrepreneurial activity
in a particular economy — it is also about thepositive (or negative) publicity, and other formsof social reaction, increasingly expressed online,
given to those starting their own business.
Figure 2.1 shows the proportion of adults ineach participating economy reporting that theyknow at least one person who has started theirown business in the past two years. Across all 49
economies, the highest level was in Saudi Arabia,

at almost nine in 10 adults, and the lowest level inJapan, just two out of 10.
There is substantial variation in the share ofadults knowing someone who has started a new
business within income groups, with perhaps
some weak indication that rising levels of income
reduce the likelihood of an adult knowing
someone who has recently started a business. It
may be easier to know an entrepreneur in a small
economy like Cyprus or Qatar, than in a large
economy like Japan or Egypt, although the chartdoes include exceptions.

10 The terms “starting a new business”, and “startup”,
are used interchangeably in this Global Report.

Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

100
90
80

% of adults 18–64

70
60
50
40
30
20
10

Egypt
South Africa
Venezuela
India
MoroccoChina
Togo
Colombia
Iran
Tunisia
Indonesia
GuatemalaBrazilGreeceTaiwanLatviaRomania
PolandMexicoHungary
PanamaSerbiaOman
Slovak Republic
Uruguay
Puerto Rico
Croatia
Chile
Japan
Germany
Republic of Korea
Luxembourg
Spain
NorwayCanadaUnited Kingdom
Austria
Switzerland
Lithuania
Slovenia
SwedenNetherlands
United States
IsraelFranceUnited Arab Emirates
Qatar
CyprusSaudi Arabia

0

Level C38

Level B

Level A

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Tatiana Pimenta
CEO & Founder, Vittude (Brazil)
Cartier Women’s Initiative Fellow, 2019

Democratizing access to mental healthservices
Nearly a billion people around the world live witha diagnosable mental disorder. Many do nothave access to effective care for various reasons.
According to the World Health Organization, Brazil
leads the world in anxiety cases and ranks fifth
for cases of depression. Public health support fortreatment remains low, so many Brazilians livingwith mental health conditions are not getting thecare they need and deserve.
Tatiana Pimenta experienced this first-hand. A
successful business executive, Tatiana faced ahost of personal challenges in 2012. Anxious to
avoid a negative impact on her career, she sought
therapy, but this brought its own set of problems.
After frustrating and unhelpful sessions with
inexperienced psychologists, she finally found a
reputable practitioner. Said Tatiana:“His office was 11 km away and traffic in São
Paulo is atrocious. It took nearly three hours
to get there and back every time. I got tothinking, ‘Couldn’t it be easier to connect
patients with therapists?’ ”
In 2016, she launched a company, Vittude, with anambitious mission: to democratize access to mental
health services by removing the financial barrier tomental health care. As a B2B2C-driven marketplace,the company connects high-quality psychologists toindividuals and corporations.
The platform combines behavioural science, AI
technology and human interaction to optimize
personal growth and professional development insupport of a person’s whole health, at work and inlife. With Vittude Match, the company is positioned
to provide a highly personalized employee
experience driving not only well-being but also
growth and peak performance.
Vittude Match helps eliminate trial and error byusing machine-learning models to match each
employee to the most effective care.

Since its founding, Vittude has built the largest
network of qualified psychologists in Brazil.
In the past two years, Vittude’s annual revenue
has grown fivefold its and its total customer basetwentyfold. To date, it has served over 100,000
members, and the number of psychotherapy
sessions has more than tripled year-on-year, as thewillingness to invest in employee well-being anddevelopment has been growing significantly.
Today, Vittude serves over 70 enterprises, including
SAP, L’Oréal, Saint-Gobain, Grupo Boticário andBanco do Brasil.
Tatiana said:“I’m very happy and grateful for all we havebuilt in the past years. There is a lot of work
to do concerning mental health awareness.
I strongly believe we have the opportunity topositively impact millions of people.”

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

39

100
90

% of adults 18–64

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10

Iran
Colombia
China
South Africa
Tunisia
MoroccoVenezuela
Egypt
BrazilGuatemala
India
Togo
Indonesia
Hungary
Slovak Republic
LatviaGreeceSerbiaTaiwanChile
PanamaMexicoUruguay
Croatia
Romania
Puerto Rico
Poland
Oman
Japan
Spain
CyprusGermany
Lithuania
Republic of Korea
United Kingdom
United States
IsraelSwitzerland
Austria
FranceLuxembourg
Slovenia
CanadaNetherlands
United Arab Emirates
NorwaySwedenQatar
Saudi Arabia

0

Level CFIGURE 2.2 ​In the next six
months, there will begood opportunities
to start a businessin my area(% adults agree)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Level B

Figure 2.2 compares the proportion of adults
agreeing11 that, in the next six months, there will
be good opportunities to start a business locally.
The highest level is again in Saudi Arabia (andagain almost nine out of 10), but now closely
followed by Indonesia. Japan again has the lowest
level (just one in eight). More generally, in all of
the Level C economies, in nine out of 15 Level B,
and in 10 out of 21 Level A economies, more thanhalf of adults agree there are good opportunities
locally; but in five economies less than one-thirdof adults agree with this (Japan, Spain, Cyprus,
the Slovak Republic and Hungary).
It may be anticipated that the pandemic has
reduced the share of adults agreeing that there
will be good opportunities to start a businesslocally, either by reducing those opportunities
or by decreasing their visibility, or perhaps
some combination of the two. One simple, butinevitably inconclusive, way to assess this is
to compare the proportion of adults agreeing
11 APS questions like this ask respondents if, for somestatement, they strongly agree, somewhat agree,neither agree nor disagree, somewhat disagree orstrongly disagree. For brevity, this chart, and others
throughout this Global Report, combines “strongly
agree” and “somewhat agree” to present thepercentage of adults agreeing.

40

Level A

there are good opportunities locally in the same
economy before the pandemic (2019) and after
what is surely the full brunt of the pandemic(2022).
Figure 2.3 compares the proportions agreeing
there will be good opportunities to start abusiness locally in 2019 and 2022 for the 37
economies that participated in GEM research inboth years. Even if these proportions had changedin the same direction (which they didn’t), thisanalysis would be inconclusive, because neither
2019 nor 2022 may be representative years.
Nevertheless, if changes of less than, say, an
arbitrary five percentage points are discounted
as small differences, the proportion of adults
agreeing to good opportunities locally fell by
more than this in 12 economies. These included
falls of 21 percentage points in the United States,
18 in China and 15 in Poland. However, nine
economies had a proportion of adults agreeing togood opportunities locally that had increased by
five percentage points or more, including Puerto
Rico (+25), Brazil (+21) and Saudi Arabia (+16).
Inevitably inconclusive indeed. Even this limited
evidence makes it clear that the impact of thepandemic on opportunity recognition has beenvery diverse. In some economies, the pandemic
may have heightened perceived opportunities,

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Iran
China
MoroccoColombia
Tunisia
BrazilGuatemalaVenezuela
TogoSouth Africa
Egypt
Indonesia
India
Slovak Republic
Puerto Rico
LatviaGreeceSerbiaCroatia
Uruguay
TaiwanRomania
MexicoHungary
Chile
PanamaOman
PolandIsraelJapan
Spain
Germany
Lithuania
Republic of Korea
CyprusAustria
FranceCanadaLuxembourg
United States
United Kingdom
Switzerland
Qatar
Slovenia
United Arab Emirates
SwedenNorwayNetherlands
Saudi Arabia% of adults 18–64

Iran

0

Level C
Level C
Level B

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report
Saudi Arabia

Qatar

SwedenNorwayUnited Arab Emirates

Level A

Netherlands

CanadaSlovenia

Luxembourg

Switzerland

IsraelUnited States

United Kingdom

Republic of Korea

Germany

Cyprus

Spain

Japan

Oman

PolandPuerto Rico

Croatia

MexicoPanamaChile

TaiwanGreeceLatviaSlovak Republic

India

GuatemalaBrazilEgypt

MoroccoSouth Africa

China

Colombia% of adults 18–64

2019
2022

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

FIGURE 2.3 ​In the next six months there will be good opportunities to start a business in my area (figures for 2019 and 2022,
37 economies; % adults agree)

Source: GEM Adult Population Surveys 2019 and 2022

100

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

Level AFIGURE 2.4 ​In my country, it is easy to start a business (% adults agree)

Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

41

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Yi Wang
Founder, Anban Tech (China)

The motivations of a serial entrepreneur
Some entrepreneurs are committed to finding asolution to a problem by means of starting andowning one company. Then there are individuals
like Yi Wang, a serial entrepreneur who has been
starting businesses since his student days and is
now involved with his seventh venture. The latest is
Anban Technology, founded in 2018.
“From the experiences with my other ventures,
I am deeply aware that software is swallowing
the world. With autonomous driving, people
will even hand over their lives to software.
Safety goes far beyond traditional information
security. The current old testing paradigm
relies on manual and static analysis thatstruggles to cope with the expanding code
scale.”
Anban Technology is addressing this tension. Since
its founding, the company has become a leader
in the commercialization of intelligent fuzzing,a paradigm-shifting opportunity in the testing
field that is driving a productivity revolution insoftware development. Recently, Anban Technology
completed a financing of over 100 million yuan,
which is the largest A round of financing in the fieldof software safety in China.
“We will continue to ensure software safetyin various industries, so that developers canfocus more on innovation and practice, andprevent software defects from being the
Achilles heel that threatens mankind.”
The results are thanks to his experiences in leading
six other companies as well as his education at
ShanghaiTech University.
“It is not enough to have ideas. The Schoolof Entrepreneurship and Management at
ShanghaiTech University has served as myguide, expanding the boundaries of mycognition and the depth of my thinking, whileproviding a solid theoretical support for myentrepreneurial practice.”and in others it may have had the opposite effect.
There is an evident need for further research into
the factors that influence opportunity recognition.
Even those who consider there will be good
opportunities to start a business locally may
hesitate if they think that starting a businessis difficult. Figure 2.4 sets out the proportionof adults in each economy who agree that it iseasy to start a business. This chart has a strong
resemblance to the earlier Figure 2.2 (althoughnote that, within income groups, economies
may be ordered differently), suggesting strong
correlation between the percentage seeing good

42

opportunities and the percentage agreeing it
is easy to start a business. Once more, Saudi
Arabia has the highest level and Japan thelowest. This relationship may be importantfor policymakers in creating environments inwhich individuals perceive starting a businessas easy, perhaps as a result of favourable
policies, support and training, because it is in
those environments that individuals see good
opportunities for starting a business that will
ultimately employ people.
Within income Level C, Iran scored the lowest
in both charts, but here the percentage seeing

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Reportgood opportunities was over twice that of thoseagreeing it is easy to start. India had aroundfour in five adults agreeing with both. In Level B
Poland had more than seven out of 10 agreeing

with both, while the Slovak Republic had lessthan one in three. Finally, in Level A, Sweden had
more than three out of four agreeing with both,while Spain had less than a third.

2.3 CAN I START A BUSINESS?
The answer is clearly yes. Businesses start in
the most difficult circumstances, sometimes run
by people with very few resources of capital,
skills or experience. And, yes, some of thesebusinesses succeed — but these are typically
few and far between. Seeing opportunities
is important, as is believing that it is easy
to start a business, or at least that obstacles
can be overcome. But even that may not beenough if you don’t think you have the skills or
experience to start a business, or if the fear of
failure prevents you from doing so. Both may
be cultural issues. Questions in the GEM APS
explicitly address these issues. Figure 2.5 charts
the percentage of adults in each participating
economy who agree they have the skills andexperience to start a business, while Figure 2.6
plots the percentage of those seeing good
opportunities (as shown in Figure 2.2) who agree

they would not start a business because of fearof failure.
As with knowing an entrepreneur, seeing
good opportunities and agreeing it is easy tostart a business, confidence in having the skills
and experience to start their own business ishighest in Saudi Arabia, and lowest in Japan.
However, in this case, agreement appears to
decline as income rises. In all economies inLevel C, a half or more of adults agree they havethe skills and experience to start. This is also
true of 11 out of 15 Level B economies, but just
11 out of 21 Level A economies. Of course, theknowledge, skills and experience needed to starta business may vary by location. What Figure 2.5
demonstrates, however, is wide variation in
self-belief.
Figure 2.6 is a bit different, showing the
proportion of those seeing good opportunities to

FIGURE 2.5 ​I have the knowledge,
skills and experienceto start myown business(% adults agree)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

100
90

% of adults 18–64

80
70
60
50
40
30
20

0

Iran
China
Egypt
MoroccoSouth Africa
Colombia
BrazilIndonesia
GuatemalaIndia
Tunisia
Venezuela
Togo
Hungary
TaiwanSlovak Republic
PolandGreeceLatviaOman
Romania
SerbiaMexicoPuerto Rico
Uruguay
Chile
Croatia
PanamaJapan
IsraelGermany
Netherlands
Spain
Switzerland
NorwaySwedenFranceLithuania
Luxembourg
CyprusAustria
United Kingdom
Republic of Korea
CanadaSlovenia
Qatar
United States
United Arab Emirates
Saudi Arabia

10

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Level A

43

70

60

% of adults 18–64

50

40

30

20

0

Iran
Venezuela
Indonesia
Colombia
Togo
Tunisia
GuatemalaMoroccoBrazil
Egypt
India
China
South Africa
Oman
Hungary
LatviaSerbiaSlovak Republic
TaiwanChile
Puerto Rico
MexicoUruguay
PanamaCroatia
GreecePolandRomania
Republic of Korea
Switzerland
Netherlands
Austria
United Arab Emirates
FranceNorwaySwedenQatar
United States
IsraelLuxembourg
Germany
Lithuania
Slovenia
Spain
Japan
CyprusCanadaUnited Kingdom
Saudi Arabia

10

Level CFIGURE 2.6 ​You would notstart a business forfear it might fail(% of those agreeing
there are good
opportunities locally)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

44

Level B

start a business locally who would be deterredfrom doing so by the fear of failure. It is not
unusual for new businesses to fail, so being
afraid of failing is a natural, if not universal,
characteristic of those starting a business. The actof starting a business demonstrates the ability toovercome those fears.
While Saudi Arabia has the highest shareof those seeing good opportunities who would
be deterred by fear of failure (just under two in
three), the lowest proportion is in the Republic ofKorea, just less than one in five.
Certainly, the fear of failure is a widespread
obstacle to starting new businesses. In 37 outof the 49 participating economies, more than
40% of those who agree that there will be good
opportunities locally would be deterred fromstarting a business by the fear of failure. Only
three economies had less than one in three
deterred (Republic of Korea, Oman and Iran).
Finding ways to overcome this fear (for example,
by reducing the costs of failure) may be a quick
way to increase startups in many economies.
Having scored so well on seeing opportunities
to start a business, believing it easy to start,
and in seeing themselves as having the skills
and experience to do so, Saudi Arabians areconspicuous at the top of the fear-of-failure table.

Level A

There is a clear need for more research into theperceived financial, social and psychologicalimpacts of business failure, and policies tomitigate these that might better turn intentions
into new starts.
One consequence of the variation in all thesefactors may be differences in the proportion of
adults who expect to start a business in the next
three years. While intentions typically run aheadof actions (it is, after all, easier to intend to dietthan to diet!), the intention to start a business may
be an indicator of the entrepreneurial intensityof a given economy. Intending to start a businessmay be a necessary, if not sufficient, condition for
doing so.
Figure 2.7 shows the proportion of adults
expecting to start a business in the next three
years, and shows much more variation than theprevious charts, both within and between income
levels. Brazil, Panama, Togo and Tunisia lead theway, each with more than a half of their adults
intending to start. Across the income levels, morethan one in three adults expect to start a businessin seven out of 13 income Level C economies, threeout of 15 Level B and just two out of 21 Level A
economies. Less than one in 10 adults share that
expectation in two Level C economies, five Level B
and Five Level A economies.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Andrés González-Silén
Co-founder and Chief Executive Officer,
Venemergencia (Venezuela)

Making a difference in the health care space
Many entrepreneurs around the world start theirbusinesses with a motivation to help others. One
such individual is Andrés González-Silén, founder ofVenemergencia, an innovative Venezuelan company
working in the health care space.
“From an early age I was clear about mypurpose: to serve other human beings just likemy father and grandfather did as doctors.”
Originally from Venezuela, González-Silén had theopportunity to complete his last years of high schoolin the UK. He opted against this.
“I felt that good doctors were more needed ina place like my home country — Venezuela. I
fulfilled my dream of becoming a Venezuelan
doctor in 2011 and started in a public hospital.”

medical services in vulnerable communities. In
the midst of the 2017 Venezuelan migratory crisis,
Venemergencia provided peace of mind for thoseleaving the country by being available for loved ones
remaining in Venezuela in cases of emergencies.
“We made it possible through an online
platform that allowed them to get a healthcare plan with insurance for their families
back home without the need of medical
exams, few exclusions and without age limits.”
With the learning from this experience,
Venemergencia created Asistensi in March 2020;
it is operating this service in six countries that aresusceptible to migration shocks.
In conclusion, González-Silén said:“I have always wanted to pursue my dreams
and serve as much as I can, following thesteps led by great leaders.”

These initial years as a doctor gave GonzálezSilén the opportunity to witness issues facing
the health care system. One concern was thatpatients were visiting the hospital unnecessarily,
simply in the absence of other options. If thesepatients were seen at home, better care could
be provided while generating cost savings.
González-Silén launched Venemergencia in2005 so that patients could receive quality carein the comfort of their own homes. By 2015,
Venemergencia had served 3.5 million patientswith a comprehensive approach of progressive
home-first health care that starts with real-timetelemedicine, home consults and ambulances.
It prevents up to 85% of unnecessary clinic visits.
“When patients can stay at home, it has adramatic impact on quality of life and leads
to significant cost savings.”
Venemergencia now employs over 550 people
and is considered a leader in the health caresector. The not-for-profit company educatesparamedics and provides emergency

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

45

60

50

% of adults 18–64

40

30

20

0

South Africa
China
India
Colombia
Iran
Venezuela
Indonesia
MoroccoGuatemala
Egypt
Tunisia
Togo
BrazilPolandRomania
GreeceSlovak RepublicHungary
SerbiaTaiwanMexicoLatviaCroatia
Puerto Rico
Uruguay
Oman
Chile
PanamaJapan
Austria
NorwayGermany
Spain
Switzerland
United Kingdom
IsraelUnited States
SwedenLuxembourg
CanadaLithuania
Slovenia
FranceNetherlands
CyprusRepublic of Korea
Saudi Arabia
Qatar
United Arab Emirates

10

Level CFIGURE 2.7 ​Are you expecting
to start a businessin the next three
years? (% adults
responding yes)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Level B

There is similar variation within each income
group, with the share of adults12 expecting tostart a business in the next three years varying,from less than one in 10 to more than four in 10, in
all three income groups.

Level AOf the 49 participating economies, there are 14
in which more than three in 10 adults expect tostart a business in the next three years. Despite
making up almost a half of the GEM participating
economies in 2022, none of these are from Europe.

2.4 INVESTING IN SOMEONE ELSE’S BUSINESS
Involvement in a new business can take many
forms, indirect as well as direct. Starting a new
business requires access to resources, including
finance. It is tempting to picture the new startup
as capital- and knowledge-intensive, in smart
new shared-space offices. The reality is usually
very different — businesses are often started
on a shoestring, using whatever money can becobbled together from savings, overdrafts, credit
cards and, often, family, friends and colleagues.
Informal investment is the act of investing money
in someone else’s new business, and is a very
particular form of entrepreneurial activity that
may be driven by family loyalty, or by friendship,
just as much as by the expectation of future
returns.
12 Strictly, this is the share of those adults not alreadyengaged in entrepreneurial activities.

46

The GEM APS asks respondents whether, inthe past three years, they have provided funds
for a new business started by someone else. The
percentage of adults responding positively isshown in Figure 2.8. While investing money insomeone else’s new business is clearly a minority
activity, it is certainly significant in a small
number of economies. The percentage was highest
in Chile, where 22% of adults had invested insomeone else’s new business, half as much morecompared to the next highest (14% in Guatemala).
Only five of 49 economies had more than one in 10
adults investing in someone else’s startup (Saudi
Arabia, Togo, Brazil, Chile and Guatemala). At thesame time, 14 of the 49 economies had less than
one in 40 adults investing in someone else’s new
business.
Geographically, the highest levels were in three
Latin American economies (Chile, Guatemala

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportSouth Africa
Venezuela
Morocco
Egypt
India
Colombia
Indonesia
China
Iran
Tunisia
BrazilTogo
GuatemalaSerbiaRomania
PolandMexicoPuerto Rico
Hungary
GreeceCroatia
Slovak Republic
Oman
LatviaTaiwanUruguay
PanamaChile
Japan
IsraelUnited Kingdom
Republic of Korea
Spain
Germany
CyprusLithuania
Slovenia
NorwayAustria
CanadaLuxembourg
FranceUnited Arab Emirates
Netherlands
United States
SwedenSwitzerland
Qatar
Saudi Arabia

0

0

Togo
Venezuela
South Africa
India
Indonesia
GuatemalaColombia
BrazilTunisia
Morocco
Iran
Egypt
China
Croatia
MexicoPanamaUruguay
Romania
Chile
SerbiaHungary
Oman
LatviaSlovak Republic
PolandPuerto Rico
GreeceTaiwanCanadaFranceSwedenSwitzerland
Lithuania
United States
Spain
Austria
Germany
CyprusUnited Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
Slovenia
Netherlands
Saudi Arabia
Japan
Qatar
NorwayLuxembourg
IsraelRepublic of Korea

US$% of adults 18–64
25

20

15

10

5

Level C

Level C

Level B

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report
Level AFIGURE 2.8 ​Informal investors (% adults)

Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

25,00020,00015,00010,0005,000

Level AFIGURE 2.9 ​Median amount invested ($US) by those investing in someone else’s new business

Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

47

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Andrea BarberCo-founder of RatedPower (Spain)
Cartier Women’s Initiative Fellow, 2021

Creating change in clean energy systems
Renewable energy can play a significant role inmitigating the impact of climate change. However,designing and building large renewable energy
plants is a time-consuming process.
Andrea Barber saw first-hand the complexity ofdesigning and engineering large solar plants.
Determined to do something about this, she
co-founded RatedPower with the mission ofdigitizing the renewable energy industry andmaximizing clean energy’s potential through asoftware as a service (SaaS) strategy. RatedPowerhelps solar photovoltaic (PV) energy enterprises
design and engineer utility-scale PV plants, thereby
furthering a green transition to clean energy
systems. Andrea said:“We developed cloud-based software to
instantly carry out the design and engineeringof large-scale solar plants to accelerate thetransition to solar energy. We’ve always loved
thinking outside the box to make things more
efficient.”
Despite concerns about the global economy,
RatedPower’s customers have not reduced theirsoftware acquisition budgets. Massive deploymentof renewable energy is a critical part of most
governments’ responses to both COVID-19 recovery
packages and policies to fight the effects of thewar in Ukraine. This includes REPowerEU in theEuropean Union and the Inflation Reduction Act in
the United States.
Andrea noted:“The fact is that diversifying the global
energy mix is key for both fighting climatechange by reducing greenhouse emissions
and guaranteeing world security. Renewableenergy — specifically solar photovoltaics — isplaying a role.”
In addition to the impact she is creating at
RatedPower, Andrea is also co-founder of Vostok
6, a podcast in Spanish that aims to raise thevisibility of women who are breaking barriers anddoing incredible work in different areas. Andrea ispositioned 30th in the current Choiseul 100 Spainranking of Future Economic Leaders and has
recently been chosen by Forbes as one of the 100
Most Creative People in Business from Spain.

48

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Reportand Brazil), two in Africa (Togo and Tunisia), andtwo in the Gulf (Saudi Arabia and Qatar). Within
Europe, the highest levels were in the north(Switzerland, Sweden and the Netherlands).
While the percentage of adults investing insomeone else’s new business is an importantmeasure of the spread of this activity, the resources
available to the new starts also depend on the
typical amount of this investment. The median13
amount invested in the startup per economy isshown in Figure 2.9, ranging from less than $100
in Togo to over $22,000 in Israel and the Republicof Korea. However, in the latter two economies,
the proportion of adults investing in someone
else’s startup was less than 3%. In Chile, with somany people investing, the median amount was$1,700. Perhaps the highest provision of informal
investment was in the Gulf, with 12% of adults in
Saudi Arabia typically investing around $7,200
each in a startup, and 9% of adults in Qatar
typically investing around $8,200 per startup.
Finally, it is instructive to look briefly at
informal investment levels before the pandemic(2019) and in 2022, noting as before that thesecomparisons will be inevitably inconclusive. It
is particularly difficult to compare small values(as with the proportion of adults investing insomeone else’s new business) in two periods,
as changes in those values may appear to bedisproportionately large. Comparing medians
between two distributions is also fraught.
Nevertheless, of the 37 economies participating
in both GEM 2019 and GEM 2022, the percentageof adults investing in someone else’s startup
increased in 16 economies and fell in the remaining
21. Most of these changes were very small. Notable
exceptions include Oman, where the proportion
fell from 10.4% to 3.5%, Colombia, where it fell
from 7.7% to 2.6%, and Brazil, where the proportionof adults investing in someone else’s businessactually increased, from 3.2% to 10.8%.
Turning to median informal investments, infour (of the 49) economies this typical investment
more than doubled (Iran, Egypt, Puerto Ricoand Israel), and in four economies this typicalinvestment more than halved (Slovak Republic,
Canada, Switzerland and Cyprus). Once again:
inevitably inconclusive indeed.

2.5 CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
The personal decision to start a new business isinevitably conditioned by the social and culturalcontext in which that decision is made. An
awareness of local opportunities, confidence in
one’s own abilities and perceptions of the easeof starting may all be important dimensions ofthat context, and may all be influences on thatdecision.
In the figures showing the percentage of adults
agreeing there are good opportunities to start abusiness, that they have the skills and experience
to do so, and that starting a business is easy,
the same economies recur towards the top ofthese scales, and these include Saudi Arabia,
Brazil, Qatar, Puerto Rico, the Netherlands andPoland. However, in each of these economies,around a half of those agreeing there will be

13 If investment per adult were arranged in ascendingorder, the median would be the midpoint. The
median can be a better measure of central tendency
in distributions where the average may be misleading
because of a small number of large values. In thischapter the median investment is referred to as the
typical investment, in order to distinguish it from theaverage.

good opportunities would not start a businessbecause of fear of failure. Hence, the shareof adults expecting to start a business in thenext three years in these economies appears
severely constrained by the fear of failure.
Overcoming this fear — for example, throughbetter knowledge of risk management techniques,
mitigating the costs of failure through changes
in insolvency regulations, or better promotionof entrepreneurial success stories — could allcontribute to an increase in startup rates.
Comparing the percentage of adults agreeing
there are good opportunities to start a businesspre- and post-pandemic (i.e. 2019 and 2022)
presents a mixed picture, as does comparing
informal investment rates over the same period. In
terms of entrepreneurial perceptions and indirect
entrepreneurial activities, such as investingmoney in someone else’s new business, it is clearthat some economies have fared much better,or suffered much less, than other economies.
Understanding the cause of these differences
could be very important for policy development in
the medium term.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report49

3Levels of Entrepreneurial
Activity Across the
Globe in 2022

Stephen Hill and Sreevas Sahasranamam

3.1 MEASURING ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY
The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM)
research project was established more than
two decades ago to do exactly that — monitor
entrepreneurial activity across the globe,
providing a benchmark for each participating
economy to allow comparisons with othereconomies, and through time. As noted
earlier, this is only possible if what is meantby entrepreneurship is defined and measured
precisely and consistently. There are many
ways to measure entrepreneurship — such ascounting the number of new firm registrations,or the number of people considering themselves
to be self-employed. Both say something about
entrepreneurship. But new firms may or may
not register, depending on the necessity andcost of doing so, while regulations regarding
those registrations may differ by country. At thesame time, many people who regard themselves
as self-employed, such as some taxi drivers,
decorators and musicians, do not consider
themselves to be running a business but rather
just earning a living for themselves.
GEM approaches entrepreneurship froma different perspective. According to GEM,
entrepreneurship is the personal act of startingor running a new business. So, in each economy
GEM asks a large random sample of people,
through the Adult Population Survey (APS), if
they are actively engaged in starting or runninga new business while being very precise about
what this means. There is no reason for anyone
to provide misleading answers because all
results are anonymized. Hence the APS capturesinformal (unregulated) activity, beyond the reachof official data, as well as formal entrepreneurial
activity. Anonymized APS data is submitted bynational teams in participating countries to the
GEM data centre, where it is checked and verified
for accuracy and consistency. The GEM data
team produces key variables in exactly the sameway for each economy, ensuring comparability.
The most important of these key variables is thelevel of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA), or the proportion of the adult14 population
who are starting or running a new business. A
new business or startup15 is one that has paid
wages or salaries, including to the owners, for no
more than 42 months. If the business continues
to pay wages and salaries beyond 42 months, it
is considered by GEM as Established Business
Ownership (EBO).

3.2 WHERE IS ENTREPRENEURIAL ACTIVITY HIGHEST?
The levels of TEA and EBO across all 49
economies participating in the GEM APS in 2022
are set out in Figure 3.1.
The proportion of adults starting or running a
new business is highest in five Latin America &Caribbean countries from middle-income (Level B)
and low-income (Level C) economies: Guatemala,50

Colombia, Panama, Chile and Uruguay, followedby high-income (Level A) United Arab Emirates
14 More precisely, and consistently, in GEM adult means
aged from 18 to 64, since it is these who are surveyed.
15 The terms “new business”, “new startup” and “newentrepreneur” are all used synonymously to refer tostarting or running a new business.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportTotal early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)
Established Business Ownership (EBO)30% of adults 18–64

25

20

15

10

5

MoroccoChina
Egypt
Indonesia
South Africa
India
Venezuela
IranTunisia
BrazilTogo
Colombia
Guatemala
PolandGreeceTaiwanRomania
Hungary
SerbiaSlovak Republic
Oman
MexicoCroatia
LatviaPuerto Rico
Uruguay
Chile
PanamaSpain
Japan
NorwayAustria
Luxembourg
Switzerland
Slovenia
CyprusIsraelGermany
SwedenFranceQatar
Republic of Korea
Netherlands
Lithuania
United Kingdom
CanadaUnited States
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates

0

Level C

Level Band low-income Togo. All these have around one
in four adults or more starting or running a new
business. At the same time, less than one in 20
adults were starting or running a new businessin Morocco or Greece, and less than one in 50 in
Poland.
Figure 3.1 shows a negative association
between TEA rates and income level, but withconsiderable variation in TEA within each of
those levels. A similar but less dramatic picture
emerges from rates of EBO, highest at one in five
adults in the Republic of Korea, but with lessthan one in 50 adults owning an established

TEA: starting a new business

Level Abusiness in South Africa and Mexico. Table 3.1
summarizes these differences by counting thenumber of economies in each category for each
income group.
Out of 13 income Level C economies, five
had less than one in 10 adults starting a new
business, while another four had more than
two in 10 adults doing the same. Within thesame Level C economies, five had less than one
in 20 adults owning an established business,while another four had more than two in
10 adults doing the same. Of the 15 Level B
economies, four had less than one in 20 adults

EBO: running an established business

Less than one in
10 adults

More than two in
10 adults

Less than one in
20 adults

More than one in
10 adults

Total
numberLevel C

5

4

5

4

13

Level B

2

4

4

3

15

Level A

12

1

6

1

21

Total

19

9

15

8

49

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

FIGURE 3.1 ​Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA) andEstablished Business
Ownership (EBO)(both % adults)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

TABLE 3.1 ​Number of economies
in each category
by income group51

owning an established business, while anotherthree had more than one in 10 doing so.
Put another way, 19 of the 49 economies had
less than one in 10 adults starting or running a
new business in 2022. Of these 19, 12 were in thehighest income group. On the other hand, nineof the 49 economies had one in 10 or more adults
starting or running a new business. Just one ofthese was a high-income economy.
These figures hint at some association between
income and the proportion of adults starting or
running a new business, an association that has
been the subject of debate over time, including
in successive Global Reports. High-income
economies certainly have more resources,
including social, educational and financial
capital, and may have a wider range of profitable
new business opportunities. But high-income
economies also have more employment
opportunities, so perhaps more to give up
by starting your own business. Low-income
economies may have fewer business opportunities
and less access to resources, but may also havefewer income alternatives, and perhaps there isless to lose by starting a business. There is also

FIGURE 3.2 ​Levels of Total earlystage Entrepreneurial
Activity and GDP
per capita
Sources: GEM Adult
Population Survey
2022 and https://data.
worldbank.org

a complex relationship between income levels,seeing opportunities, and feeling the necessity
to start a business. The net effect is a tangled
two-way relationship between the share of adults
starting their own business and average income
at an economy level. This tangle is well illustrated
by Figure 3.2, which plots Gross Domestic
Product (GDP) per capita against TEA for the 49
participating GEM economies in 2022, combining
GEM APS data for TEA with World Bank data for
GDP per capita.
While the scatterplot suggests some negative
association between TEA and GDP per capita,16
this association is at best weak, and there are
high-income economies with relatively highlevels of TEA (including the United States, Saudi
Arabia and Canada), just as there are low-income
economies with relatively low levels of TEA(Morocco and Egypt).
Recent years have seen increasing concerns
about the appropriateness of GDP as a measureof well-being, including concerns about the

16 The TEA–GDP/capita correlation coefficient is −0.235.

3530

GuatemalaColombia% TEA rate

25

United Arab Emirates

Togo

Brazil20
Tunisia15

PanamaChile
Uruguay

Puerto Rico

Iran

Saudi Arabia

United States

CanadaVenezuela

LatviaUnited Kingdom
Croatia
Lithuania
Netherlands
Oman
Republic of Korea
India
Slovak Republic
Qatar
SerbiaHungary
IsraelSwedenSouth Africa
FranceIndonesia
Romania Cyprus Slovenia Germany
Switzerland
Austria
Egypt
TaiwanNorwayJapan
China
Mexico105MoroccoLuxembourg

Spain

GreecePoland00

20,00040,00060,00080,000100,000

120,000

140,000

160,000

GDP per capita ($)

52

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHTCharlotte Wang
Founder of EQuota (China)
Cartier Women’s Initiative Fellow, 2020

Entrepreneurship and the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals
Entrepreneurship is an essential driver of societal
health and wealth. It can address some of the
globe’s greatest challenges, such as the United
Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). Oneof the many entrepreneurs around the world thatcan speak to this is EQuota founder Charlotte Wang.
The company combines artificial intelligence andbig data to deliver energy efficiency solutions. Says
Charlotte:“Sustainability means a responsibility for thisand the next generation.”
Charlotte was raised in a rural village in China
known for its coal mining. She saw how this activity
negatively impacted citizens’ health. From a youngage, she experienced issues with her sinuses andbreathing. At the age of 11, Charlotte moved with herfamily near the coastline city of Dalian, China. Whileshe still continued to struggle with her sinuses,
Charlotte was able to enjoy a different environment
with much cleaner air. Following the birth of her firstchild, Charlotte decided to leverage her education
at MIT in the United States and her experiences in
China to launch EQuota in 2014.
“It is truly our generation’s duty to improve
our environment. After my time at MIT, I felt astrong calling to be back in China.”
Charlotte sees EQuota’s services as similar topersonal fitness monitoring tools that provide
immediate, real-time feedback to facilitate healthierchoices. For large energy consumers, EQuota’s
non-intrusive technology gathers data from existing
monitoring systems such as smart meters andapplies artificial intelligence (AI) to analyse usage
patterns and identify inefficiencies. Customers

access the data using an online dashboard andhave reported significant annual fatality decreases,
electricity conserved, carbon emissions reduced andmoney saved. The positive feedback from clients andthe push to reduce carbon emissions are playing arole in Charlotte’s future thinking to tackle climatechange through data insights.
“My plan is to use our service starting fromthe energy demand side — manufacturers
and buildings — to transmission to energy
generation to get system-level change. Solving
climate change and sustainability requires
all of us to keep relentless focus. I truly believethat innovative technology provides different
views for addressing climate change while
striving for harmony in the environment.”

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

53

35

30

GuatemalaColombia

PanamaChile

Uruguay

25

20% TEA rate

United Arab Emirates

Togo

BrazilTunisia

MexicoIndia

10South Africa

Indonesia

Egypt

5

MoroccoUnited States

Saudi Arabia

CanadaIranVenezuela

15

Puerto Rico

LatviaUnited Kingdom
Lithuania
Netherlands
Oman
Slovak Republic
Republic of Korea
Qatar
SerbiaGermany
Hungary
FranceSwedenRomania
CyprusIsraelSwitzerland
Slovenia
NorwaySpain
China
Luxembourg
GreeceTaiwan Japan
Austria
Croatia

Poland

0
0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

Human Development Index (HDI)

FIGURE 3.3 ​Levels of Total earlystage Entrepreneurial
Activity andthe UN Human
Development Index
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022
and https://hdr.undp.org

54

distribution of income within economies, andabout the sustainability of those incomes.17 There
are also questions about how closely GDP relates
to people and their development. Alternative
indicators of well-being are gaining credibility.
One such alternative is the United Nations Human
Development Index,18 itself an aggregate ofthree components: human longevity, including
life expectancy; knowledge, including years ofeducation; and standard of living, including Gross
National Income per capita. These components
are combined to produce a Human Development
Index (HDI), located on a scale from 0 to 1.
Figure 3.3 plots the association between TEA andHDI for the 49 economies in GEM 2022, using HDI
figures from the United Nations website.
The association between HDI and national
TEA is negative:19 there are some economies
with high levels of human development and low
levels of TEA, such as Poland, Greece and Taiwan,

and some economies with low levels of humandevelopment and high levels of TEA, such as
Togo and Guatemala. The association is not close,though, and there are also economies with highlevels of both TEA and HDI, such as the United
Arab Emirates and the United States, and otherswith low TEA and low HDI such as Morocco andChina.
There is much work to be done, both in refining
measures and indicators of well-being and inestablishing the relationship between thoseindicators and the level of entrepreneurship.
The distributed nature of the scatterplot
poses multiple interesting questions forentrepreneurship and well-being research.
Why do certain countries with high HDI
also have high entrepreneurship rates? One
potential explanation from existing research isthe presence of informal cultural institutions
in certain countries which augment formal

17 Van den Bergh, J.C.J.M. (2009). The GDP paradox.
Journal of Economic Psychology, 30(2), 117–35. doi:
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2008.12.001

18 See https://hdr.undp.org.
19 The correlation coefficient between TEA and HDI is−0.333.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

an attractive choice? It is essentially a question ofwhether those starting a new business consider
themselves to be better off, either than they were
before, or compared to those who are not startingor running a new business in countries with highHDI.

institutions facilitating human development
to support entrepreneurial activity.20 Anothermore radical question to ask, given the relatively
high clustering in the bottom-right corner of thescatterplot is, when countries have conditions ofhigh HDI, is entrepreneurship not envisaged as

3.3 HOW HAS THE PANDEMIC AFFECTED LEVELS OFENTREPRENEURSHIP?
straightforward. Figure 3.4 charts the level of TEA
since 2019 (pre-pandemic) for the 32 economies
that participated in the GEM APS in each of thefour years since then.21
If the principle of comparison isstraightforward, the practice is rather less so. For
example, compare levels of entrepreneurshipin 2019 and 2022. If changes of less than one
percentage point are discounted, there are 12
economies in which TEA was higher in 2022 than

There are many ways to assess the impact of thepandemic on levels of entrepreneurship. Perhaps
the most obvious is to compare the level ofentrepreneurship (percentage of adults starting
and running a new business) at different times
before and during the pandemic. The consistencyof the APS makes these comparisons relatively

20 Sahasranamam, et al., op. cit.; Stephan, U., Uhlaner,
L.M., & Stride, C. (2015). Institutions and social
entrepreneurship: The role of institutional voids,
institutional support, and institutional configurations.
Journal of International Business Studies, 46(3),308–31. doi: https://doi.org/10.1057/jibs.2014.38

21 Note that the number of economies represented
is rather less than in 2022 alone, because not all
economies participate every year.

2019

2020

2021

FIGURE 3.4 ​Levels of Total earlystage Entrepreneurial
Activity eachyear since 2019(32 economies
participating in
GEM for all four
years; % adults)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Surveys
2019, 2020, 2021, 2022

2022

40

% of adults 18–64

30

20

10

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

CanadaUnited States

Republic of Korea

United Arab Emirates

Qatar

IsraelSaudi Arabia

CyprusNetherlands

Switzerland

Luxembourg

United Kingdom

NorwaySwedenSlovenia

Germany

Chile

Spain

PanamaLatviaCroatia

Slovak Republic

GreeceOman

PolandGuatemalaBrazilIndia

Colombia

Morocco

Iran

Egypt

0

Level A

55

FIGURE 3.5 ​The percentageof those startingor running a new
business who think
doing so is moredifficult (includes
both somewhat andmuch more difficult)than one year ago(% Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity)

in 2019, and 16 in which TEA had fallen. The
largest percentage point increases were in the
United Arab Emirates (+9 percentage points), andin Iran and Colombia (both +6), while the largest
falls were in Chile (−10), Morocco (−7), and Israel(−4). There are four economies in which TEA felleach year from 2019 to 2022: Morocco, Poland,
Luxembourg and Cyprus, so for those economies it
may be reasonable to conclude that the pandemic
adversely affected early-stage entrepreneurial
activity. There are also five economies in which
the level of TEA fell at the start of the pandemic(2019–2020), recovered somewhat to 2021, andthen fell again in 2022 (India, Switzerland, Israel,
the Korean Republic and Canada). There are also
economies in which the level of TEA has been
increasing, despite the pandemic? Is it possible
that, even in those economies, TEA would
have increased further without the pandemic?
Emerging research evidence points to the agilityof entrepreneurs22 and the ecosystem23 in
adapting to COVID adversities as being crucial.

There is also the important question of whether
the war in Ukraine and subsequent changes inenergy costs have had any discernible impact
on levels of entrepreneurship worldwide. Thisimplies looking at changes in the proportion of
adults starting or running a new business in 2022
compared to 2021. Keep in mind that the APS isnormally conducted in late summer, a period
coinciding with the early stages of the conflict in
Ukraine, so GEM data for summer 2022 is unlikely
to include the total repercussions of that conflict.
Of the 32 economies represented in Figure 3.4 inboth 2021 and 2022, 14 had increased proportionsof adults starting or running a new business,while 17 had a decrease in this proportion, with
one unchanged. The largest increases in TEA werein Colombia (+12 percentage points), the United
Arab Emirates (+9), and Iran (+8). All three are
significant oil and/or gas exporters. Meanwhile,the largest decreases were in Qatar (−5) andCanada (−4), also both energy exporters, although
the latter on a minor scale. So there was no clear

22 Stephan, U., et al. (2022). Act or wait-and-see?
Adversity, agility, and entrepreneur wellbeing
across countries during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice. doi: https://doi.
org/10.1177/10422587221104820

23 Sahasranamam, S., & Soundararajan, V. (2022).
Innovation ecosystems: What makes them
responsive during emergencies? British Journalof Management, 33(1), 369–89. doi: https://doi.
org/10.1111/1467-8551.12553

Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey,2022

90
80
70

% TEA rate

60
50
40
30
20

0

MoroccoIndonesia
Egypt
Venezuela
Colombia
BrazilSouth Africa
GuatemalaIran
Tunisia
India
Togo
China
Slovak Republic
Oman
SerbiaPolandCroatia
Uruguay
TaiwanGreeceHungary
Romania
LatviaMexicoPuerto Rico
PanamaChile
Saudi Arabia
Slovenia
SwedenUnited Arab Emirates
Japan
Switzerland
FranceNetherlands
Qatar
Israel
NorwayGermany
Austria
United Kingdom
Republic of Korea
Luxembourg
CanadaLithuania
Spain
United States
Cyprus10

Level C

56

Level B

Level A

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportTotal early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)
Established Business Ownership (EBO)

70

60% of adults 18–64

50

40

30

20

10

Togo
Tunisia
Iran
China
MoroccoEgyptIndonesia
Venezuela
Colombia
GuatemalaSouth Africa
BrazilIndia
Hungary
SerbiaGreeceSlovak Republic
Croatia
LatviaPolandTaiwanUruguay
Oman
MexicoPanamaRomania
Chile
Puerto Rico
Republic of Korea
Japan
Lithuania
SwedenAustria
NorwaySwitzerland
FranceCyprusSpain
Germany
Netherlands
Slovenia
IsraelUnited Arab Emirates
United States
Luxembourg
CanadaUnited Kingdom
Qatar
Saudi Arabia

0

Level C

pattern of gains or losses in the share of adults
starting a new business, although, as noted above,the 2022 APS may have been too early to capture
the full impacts. It is also worth noting that, while
31 of the 32 economies had experienced changes
in TEA, in 10 economies that change was less than
one percentage point.
So the evidence is mixed on whether either
the pandemic or the war in Ukraine has had an
impact on the share of adults starting or runninga new business. Another area that both may
have impacted is the attitudes and perceptions of
those adults who are starting or running a new
business. Those impacts may have been positiveor negative. The GEM APS asks those identified
as starting or running a new business whether
starting a business is more difficult than one year
ago, with results shown in Figure 3.5.
There was widespread, though not universal,
agreement that starting was more difficult, agreed
by more than half of adults in 9 out of 13 Level
C economies, 3 out of 15 Level B, and 4 out of
21 Level A economies. The proportion agreeing
reduced slightly with income. The highest levels
were in China, Togo, Chile and India, with theLevel B

Level A

lowest levels in the Slovak Republic and Saudi
Arabia. The Slovak Republic borders Ukraine
but had the lowest proportion of entrepreneurs
thinking it was more difficult to start a businessin the entire 49 economy sample. The other three
countries bordering Ukraine had rather higher
levels, but were not out of line with other middleincome economies.
A recurring theme of Global Reports throughout
the pandemic has been the ability of many
entrepreneurs to see new business opportunities
in adversity. In the early days of the pandemic,
those opportunities were focused on areas likemaking personal protective equipment, local
delivery services, or educational or fitness
programs online. As the pandemic has continued,
many opportunities have become less obvious,
such as advising on career changes, producing
online content, or providing minor medical
services that have become increasingly difficult toaccess. Questions in the APS ask those starting or
running a new business whether the coronavirus
pandemic has provided new opportunities thatthey wish to pursue, and asked Established
Business Owners whether the pandemic has led

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

FIGURE 3.6 ​The percentageof those startinga new business
who agree that the
pandemic has led to
new opportunities
they wish to
pursue, and the
proportion of thoserunning establishedbusinesses whoare pursuing suchopportunities(% Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity and% Established
Business Ownership)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 202257

to new opportunities that are currently being
pursued (Figure 3.6). Note that, while the two setsof responses are presented side by side in the same
chart, expressing a wish to pursue opportunities isprobably a lot easier than actually doing so.
Given this caveat, it is perhaps not surprisingthat, in all but four of the 49 economies (theUnited Arab Emirates, Egypt, Tunisia and Togo),
the share of those starting a business who agree
the pandemic had led to opportunities they
wished to pursue was higher than the share ofthose running established businesses who werealready pursuing such opportunities. Conversely,
there were four economies in which more than

twice the share of new entrepreneurs agreed
that they had new opportunities because of thepandemic than owners of established businesses:
Oman, Cyprus, Japan and the Republic of Korea.
Though Korea had the highest EBO rate (seeFigure 3.1), there are massive differences in theperceptions of new opportunities because of thepandemic, with five new entrepreneurs agreeing
to this for every established business doing thesame.
More than half of new entrepreneurs saw
pandemic-led opportunities in six of the 13 Level
C economies, six of the 15 Level B economies andseven of the 21 Level A economies. Meanwhile,

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Vitja and Marjana Sikošek
Co-founders of Vitjashop d.o.o. (Slovenia)

well-being and appearance. It offers comprehensive
solutions for achieving goals through dietarychanges and optimization of trace elements in thebody.

How government programs can propel
entrepreneurs
Vitja Sikošek has loved nature and exercise eversince he was a little boy. He now has the opportunity
to incorporate his hobbies and passion into his work
having co-founded Vitjashop d.o.o. together with hiswife Marjana.
The company runs the vitja.si website, which raises
awareness about the importance of health, fitness,

Fulfilling this childhood dream has been madepossible thanks in part to a government program.
Vitjashop d.o.o. was incubated within the scale-up
program of Venture Factory, made possible by
SPIRIT Slovenia. The company received a convertible
loan from the Slovene Enterprise Fund and joined
the startup Plus program in 2020. Today, Vitjashop
d.o.o. markets its own and other innovative products
and has built a large community of trustingcustomers.
According to Vitja, he decided to become anentrepreneur because he truly enjoys working
on his hobby and appreciates the freedom towork in different places, including summers by
the seaside. He inspired Marjana to become anentrepreneur as well and join the company asa co-founder. Marjana and Vitja say that they
complement each other perfectly in their workand are like yin and yang. What one lacks, theother makes up for. They say:
“Entrepreneurship allows us to live a fulfilled
life. It is like a never-ending game. The work
never ends, but if you love what you do, you
are happy to do it even on holidays, weekends
and wherever you are.”58

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Reportthere were three economies in each income level
in which less than one in five new entrepreneurs
saw pandemic-led opportunities to pursue.
Established Business Owners were less optimistic:
just two economies had over half of their

Established Business Owners pursuing pandemic
opportunities (India and Brazil), while there were
three economies in each income level with lessthan one in five Established Business Owners
pursuing pandemic opportunities.

3.4 IN WHAT SECTORS ARE NEW BUSINESSES STARTED —AND DOES THIS MATTER?
The choice of the sector in which to start abusiness is important, not only to that businessbut to the economy more widely. It is easier
to start a business in a sector that is growing,
and easier to attract customers who are new tothe sector than to entice customers away fromtheir established suppliers. Sectors differ in the
resources required to start a business, including
knowledge and capital, and in the barriers to newentry, such as market restrictions or economies
of scale that impose a cost penalty on the new,small-scale producer. New or growing sectors
attract resources away from sectors that are
declining, and the entry of new businesses (andthe exit of old businesses) are important parts ofthis process of structural change.

Most new owners start businesses in areasin which they already have some knowledge orexperience, including established networks orrole models to follow. Entry is usually easiest
where there are fewest entry barriers and lowest
costs, in personal services such as taxi-driving,decorating or small-scale retailing, or in low-levelbusiness services such as delivery or officecleaning. Unfortunately, the same factors thatfacilitate easy entry, such as low startup costs,
also magnify competition, so margins are typicallyvery low and failure rates high. This can be an
important part of the explanation of why the ratioof new to established businesses can be very highin environments in which few new businesses
survive long enough to become established.

Business-oriented services

FIGURE 3.7 ​Business services
and consumer
services as apercentage ofTotal early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (% TEA)GEM Adult Population
Survey 2022

Consumer-oriented services

90
80
70

% TEA rate

60
50
40
30
20
10

Indonesia
Togo
India
Venezuela
GuatemalaTunisia
Egypt
South Africa
Colombia
China
Morocco
Iran
BrazilMexicoPanamaTaiwanSerbiaOman
Uruguay
Chile
GreecePolandRomania
Puerto Rico
Slovak RepublicHungary
LatviaCroatia
Saudi Arabia
Republic of Korea
United Arab Emirates
Lithuania
United States
CyprusQatar
Germany
Netherlands
SwedenCanadaFranceUnited Kingdom
Austria
Slovenia
Switzerland
Spain
NorwayLuxembourg
Japan
Israel0

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Level A

59

Entry is harder, but prospects are probably
better, in sectors requiring high levels ofcapital and/or specialist knowledge, such astechnology-intensive goods or services, which
are easily differentiated and therefore attract
premium prices. Many of these are products
or services for businesses, rather than for
consumers. There are, of course, other sectors,
such as resource extraction and processing,or agriculture, but these tend to rely on thespecific natural resource endowments ofparticular economies. Another important sector
is transport, usually dominated by large existingproducers and typically offering little attraction
to the new entrepreneur.
The focus of this section is on the two broad
sectors of consumer services and businessservices. Of the 49 economies in GEM 2022,
there were just three (Togo, Tunisia and Egypt)where consumer plus business services together
accounted for less than 60% of new starts.
Togo’s economy has large mining and agriculture
sectors, while Tunisia has the same plus oil andtourism. Egypt is reliant on its agricultural andtourism sectors. On the other hand, in 40 of the
49 countries participating in the 2022 GEM APS,
consumer plus business services constituted morethan two out of three new starts.
Figure 3.7 shows consumer and businessservices as a percentage of TEA. Consumer
services made up 88% of startups in Saudi Arabia
and Indonesia, 78% in Guatemala and 75% inMexico, compared to just 31% in Norway andSlovenia and 33% in Croatia. Business services
ranged from just 2% of starts in Indonesia to over
43% in Israel. There were just three economies inwhich the percentage of starts in business services
equalled or exceeded that in consumer services:
Croatia, Slovenia and Norway.
More generally, there are three or more
new businesses in consumer services for each
one in business services in 12 out of 13 Level C
economies, seven out of 15 Level B, and just threeout of 21 Level A economies. High-income Saudi
Arabia is a notable exception by having, in 2022,
more than 20 new consumer services businesses
for every new one in business services, a ratio
only exceeded by low-income Indonesia.

3.5 CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
GEM is precise and consistent in measuring
entrepreneurship, defined as the act ofstarting or running a new business. Early-stage
entrepreneurship levels across the 49 economies
participating in the GEM APS are highest, atmore than one in four adults, in five Latin
America & Caribbean economies, and lowest,
at less than one in 20 adults, in Poland and two
Mediterranean economies. However, there isconsiderable variation in these proportions acrossand within income levels.
As in previous Global Reports, the data show
a negative association between average incomes(measured by GDP per capita) and levels of
TEA, though with many counter-examples. This
year, for the first time, GEM has considered analternative measure of well-being, the United
Nations Human Development Index (HDI), which
also reveals some negative association with TEA.
Levels of entrepreneurial activity across the
pandemic period reveal a very mixed picture,with a number of economies experiencing a fallin TEA, but with a similar number experiencing
an increase over the same period. Analysing andunderstanding why some have increased while60

others have fallen could have important policy
implications. Comparisons over the past two years
present a similarly mixed picture, making any
impacts of the conflict in Ukraine, and subsequent
price changes, difficult to discern at this early stage.
Among those starting or running a new
business in 2022, there was widespread agreementthat doing so was more difficult than a year
earlier, particularly in low-income economies.
More positively, there was also broad agreementthat the pandemic had led to new opportunities topursue, though a little less so among establishedbusinesses.
New starts continue to be concentrated on
consumer services, although this concentration
generally falls as income level rises. Consumer
services can be fiercely competitive, with low
margins and little sustainability, so a focus on
consumer services may be related to having
high numbers of business starts relative to
numbers of established businesses since few of
those starts survive to maturity. Encouraging
new entrepreneurs to look beyond easy-entry
sectors could help them to develop more durable
businesses.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportEntrepreneurial
Motivations andResponsibilities

4

Stephen Hill and Fatima Boutaleb

4.1 INTRODUCTION: A WORLD OF CHANGE
There are many reasons why individuals choose
entrepreneurship. The personal decision to starta business can be the product of a single burning
desire, such as for autonomy after working forsomeone else, or maybe the result of multiple
motives, including seeking a personal fortune,
securing a career or perhaps generating at least
some income when there are few alternatives.
Some families are serial or generational
entrepreneurs, so starting a business can be an
expected career choice. Still others care less about
wealth or family traditions: they are startinga business because they feel a responsibility
to change the world, to make it better, more
inclusive or more meaningful. All of these are
perfectly valid reasons in a world where there islittle certainty and still less reassurance.
A changing world is nothing new. Many of thesechanges are positive, such as more inclusion, lessdiscrimination, more awareness of individual
choice and less pressure to conform. Starting abusiness is no longer chiefly the prerogative of thewealthy or the well educated. At the same time, itis easy to perceive the future as darker than before,
as the climate warms, opinions polarize and truth
becomes harder to find. In the face of this — as
noted earlier — starting a business is a victory for
confidence, that triumph of hope over experience.
Certainly, the world is changing. But people do nothave to be passive spectators of change. Starting abusiness is one of the few ways an individual canbecome a sailor in that sea of change, mastering
their destiny and perhaps nudging the world in aslightly better direction.
This chapter will look not only at the
motivations of the person starting a business,and there is often more than one, but also atwhat those who are starting businesses see
as their responsibilities, particularly to social
well-being and to the environment. As the global
economy begins to recover from the pandemic,
new opportunities emerge to live and work
differently, and this applies as well to burgeoning
entrepreneurs, many of whom are managing to be
profitable while also contributing to a fairer, moreequal and more sustainable society.

4.2 CHANGING THE WORLD
Whatever the aspirations of the new entrepreneur
might be, in 2022 they had to be pursued in a
global economy that had been showing signs ofrecovery after the pandemic and was then subject
to ongoing supply-side difficulties and rising
prices before these were magnified by the war
in Ukraine. It would be reasonable to assume
that expectations for business growth, for thosestarting a business in 2022, would be lower thana year earlier. Yet that was not, in general, how

new entrepreneurs saw it. The Adult Population
Survey (APS) asks those starting or runninga new business if, compared to one year ago,
their growth expectations are lower, the sameor higher.24 The results for 2022 are shown in
Figure 4.1.

24 In this case, lower includes both “much lower” and“somewhat lower”.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

61

70

60

% TEA

50

40

30

20

0

BrazilVenezuela
GuatemalaColombia
Indonesia
South Africa
Egypt
Iran
Morocco
India
Tunisia
China
Togo
SerbiaUruguay
Hungary
Puerto Rico
Oman
TaiwanCroatia
MexicoRomania
PolandPanamaLatviaSlovak Republic
Chile
GreeceJapan
NorwaySlovenia
Saudi Arabia
IsraelSwedenNetherlands
Qatar
United Arab Emirates
FranceSwitzerland
CyprusLithuania
United States
CanadaUnited Kingdom
Germany
Luxembourg
Spain
Austria
Republic of Korea

10

Level CFIGURE 4.1 ​The proportionof those startingor running a new
business andreporting lower
growth expectations
than a year ago(% Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Level B

Less than a quarter of new entrepreneurs
reported lower growth expectations than a year
earlier in three Level C economies, five Level B
and 11 Level A, suggesting growth expectations
fall slightly with income level. In just fiveeconomies — Togo, China, Tunisia, India and the
Korean Republic — over half of new entrepreneurs
had lower growth expectations than a year earlier.
Given the global economic turbulence of2022, it may be useful to compare the growth
expectations of new entrepreneurs in 2022 to
those of new entrepreneurs a year earlier, withthis data available for the 38 national teams thatparticipated in the GEM APS in both 2021 and2022. That comparison is shown in Figure 4.2.
These economies fall into two distinct groups.
In 12 economies, the difference between 2021
and 2022 is less than five percentage points:

Level A

seven from Europe, two from Africa, along with
Uruguay, Canada and the United Arab Emirates,suggesting little change. But there is anothergroup of 11 economies for which the differenceis 10 percentage points or more, implying
substantial change. All of these 11 economies
had seen the percentage of new entrepreneurs
with lower growth expectations fall, sometimes
dramatically. Examples include India (from 81%
to 52%), Poland (57% to 31%) and Iran (62% to45%). There is no obvious connection between
all 11, since all regions and all income groups(including three Level A) are represented. At theother end of the scale, 15 economies saw increases
in the proportion of new entrepreneurs with lower
growth expectations, the highest being the United
Kingdom (+10 percentage points), followed by
Romania and Spain (each +9).

4.3 WHY START A BUSINESS?
Since 2019, the GEM APS has asked those startingor running a new business whether they agreed
with the following four defined motivations:• To make a difference in the world;• To build great wealth or very high income;62• To continue a family tradition;• To earn a living because jobs are scarce.
Entrepreneurs can somewhat agree or strongly
agree with each motivation — and many do so.
The proportions of those starting or running

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

2021

2022

90
80
70

% TEA

60
50
40
30
20

a business, and agreeing25 with either of thefirst two motivations are shown in Figure 4.3,
and those agreeing with the third or fourth
motivations in Figure 4.4.
The proportion of entrepreneurs agreeing withthe motivation “to make a difference in the world”
in 2022 generally declined with income level, withrather less agreement in Level A than in B or C,
but not by much. More than seven out of 10 new
entrepreneurs agreed with this motive in four out
of 13 Level C economies, two out of 15 Level B andjust one out of 21 Level A economies. The highest
levels of agreement were in Romania, Guatemala,India and South Africa, dispelling any notion thatmaking a difference is only a motivation for thewell-off. The lowest levels of agreement were in
the Republic of Korea, Morocco and China.
The proportion of new entrepreneurs agreeing
with the motivation “to build great wealth orvery high income” was generally a more popular
choice than “to make a difference in the world”,
with a higher proportion agreeing in 34 of the 49
economies, although the differences were usually

25 Throughout the chapter, agree includes both“somewhat agree” and “strongly agree”.

Spain

Republic of Korea

Germany

CanadaUnited Kingdom

United States

CyprusLevel A

small. The motivation “to build great wealth orvery high income” was as popular in high-income
as in low-income economies, agreed by more than
three out of four of those starting or running a
new business in five Level C economies and five
Level A. Only five economies had less than 40% of
their entrepreneurs agreeing with this motivation.
Interestingly, all were in Europe. Last year’s
Global Report noted that “wealth generation
remains a formidable driver of entrepreneurial
activity”. Results from the 2022 GEM APS offer
strong confirmation of this assessment.
The motivation “to continue a family
tradition” continues to be important in aminority of economies, especially low-income
ones. This motivation was agreed with by overhalf of the new entrepreneurs in three Level C
economies, but just one Level B and one Level A.
Conversely, this was agreed by one in four new
entrepreneurs or less in two Level C economies,
five Level B, and 11 Level A economies. The
highest agreements were in low-income
India (69%) and high-income Saudi Arabia(62%), although Saudi was an anomaly in thehigh-income group, which provided the lowest
levels of agreement in the Republic of Korea(5%) and Switzerland (14%).

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Lithuania

FranceSwitzerland

Qatar

Netherlands

IsraelSwedenSlovenia

United Arab Emirates

Level B

Saudi Arabia

Japan

NorwayChile

GreeceLatviaSlovak Republic

PolandLevel CPanamaCroatia

Romania

Oman

Hungary

India

Uruguay

Iran

Morocco

Egypt

South Africa

Colombia

Brazil0

Guatemala10

FIGURE 4.2 ​Expectations oflower growth for
new entrepreneurs:
comparison
between 2021 and2022 (38 economies;% Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity).
Source: GEM Adult
Population Surveys
2021, 2022

63

Level C

064
Morocco
China
Tunisia
Iran
Colombia
Indonesia
Togo
Venezuela
Egypt
BrazilSouth Africa
India
Guatemala
PolandSerbiaGreeceSlovak Republic
LatviaOman
Uruguay
Croatia
TaiwanChile
Hungary
MexicoPanamaPuerto Rico
Romania
Republic of Korea
FranceJapan
IsraelAustria
Spain
Lithuania
Germany
SwedenCyprusNetherlands
Qatar
NorwaySlovenia
United Kingdom
United Arab Emirates
Luxembourg
Switzerland
CanadaSaudi Arabia
United States

0

Level C

Morocco
Iran
China
Togo
Indonesia
Venezuela
Tunisia
Colombia
BrazilSouth Africa
Guatemala
Egypt
India
PolandHungary
SerbiaLatviaTaiwanCroatia
Uruguay
Chile
Puerto Rico
Slovak Republic
Oman
GreeceRomania
PanamaMexicoRepublic of Korea
Switzerland
SwedenIsraelUnited Kingdom
Austria
Spain
FranceNorwayLithuania
Netherlands
CyprusJapan
Slovenia
Qatar
Germany
United Arab Emirates
United States
Luxembourg
CanadaSaudi Arabia

% TEA

% TEA

“To make a difference in the world”

Level B“To continue a family tradition”

Level B“To build great wealth or very high income”

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Level AFIGURE 4.3 ​Agreement with motivations “to make a difference in the world” and “to build great wealth or very high income”(% Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity)

Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

“To earn a living because jobs are scarce”

90

80

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

Level AFIGURE 4.4 ​Agreement with motivations “to continue a family tradition” and “to earn a living because jobs are scarce”(% Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity)

Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

The motivation “to earn a living because jobs
are scarce” was more popular, although that
popularity declined with income level. This
motivation was agreed with by over three out offour new entrepreneurs in 11 Level C economies,
four Level B and just one Level A economy, andby under a half of new entrepreneurs in no Level
C economy, just one Level B economy, but in 10
Level A economies.
Recall that “to build great wealth or very
high income” had been equally popular inboth low-income and high-income economies.

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Gilles Suard
Founder, Almighty Tree (Switzerland)

How educational experiences can help
inspire and inform future entrepreneurs
GEM’s Adult Population Survey asks respondents
about their highest level of educational attainment.
A great example of someone who used theireducational experiences to launch a company
is Gilles Suard, founder of Almighty Tree and a
graduate of the School of Management Fribourg(HEG-FR), University of Applied Sciences and Arts
Western Switzerland (HES-SO).
The mission of Almighty Tree is to act against
climate change, create a cleaner environment, andraise awareness about the role of business and thegeneral public about carbon emissions. In response,the company plants trees in Switzerland and abroad.
“On one hand, my education inspired me
to launch a business and, on the other
hand, it prepared me to face the challenges
associated with such an adventure.”
During Gilles’ studies (MSc BA, major in
entrepreneurship), he was exposed to successstories, entrepreneurs’ presentations/lectures,case studies on entrepreneurship and innovation,company visits, and the entrepreneurship ecosystem
in Boston.
“Such action-oriented activities inspired me,
influenced my career choices and reinforced
my deep desire to be an entrepreneur. I also
received the appropriate knowledge for
execution, from idea to the market. I wasable to learn about the wide spectrum offields needed to launch a business, such as
marketing, finance, law, growth management
and leadership.”During his studies, he took part in Venture In Action,a project that allowed students to launch a realbusiness. He went through all the steps needed tostart a new business. He pitched an idea, createda team, tested and challenged the original idea,
launched a go-to-market strategy, and truly lived anauthentic entrepreneurial journey. In the process, he
saw first-hand the importance of perseverance.
In conclusion, Gilles said:“All my educational experiences informed me
about how hard it is at the beginning of aventure and taught me how to keep going.”

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report65

A brief inspection of Figures 4.3 and 4.4
shows that “to earn a living because jobs are
scarce” typically had higher agreement than“to build great wealth or very high income” inlow-income economies, the two being roughly
the same in middle-income economies, but “tobuild great wealth or very high income” wasthe more popular of the two motivations inhigh-income economies, largely because the

FIGURE 4.5 ​The proportionof those startingor running a new
business, or runningan establishedbusiness, who
expect to use moredigital technologies
to sell their products
or services in thenext six months(% Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity and% Established
Business
Ownership).
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

agreement with “to earn a living because jobs
are scarce” had declined with income. Noneof this is surprising, given that jobs are likely
to be scarcer in low- compared to high-income
economies.
If Figures 4.3 and 4.4 contain a surprise, it isthat “to make a difference in the world” had, on
the whole, more agreement among low-income
economies than in high-income economies.

4.4 BECOMING A DIGITAL WORLD
The pandemic has led to substantial changes
in the ways that we live and work, not least in
how business is conducted. This provides anopportunity to examine digitalization as a tool forrecovery, as businesses adopt digital technology
to gain a competitive advantage and to enhance
performance-related outcomes such as the
pursuit of new opportunities — in particular,
opportunities emerging with the pandemic.
Digitalization is global but highly unequal,with a digital divide evident among societies.26
However, digitalization is commonly perceived
to be a beneficial means for creating competitive
advantages.

Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)

The pre-pandemic gentle drift towards onlinetransactions became a torrent for both consumers
and producers, a wave that shows little sign ofabating. To monitor the impacts of online changes
on new entrepreneurs, the 2021 APS asked boththose starting a new business and those running

26 See, for example, Samsami, M., & Schøtt, T. (2022).
Past, present and intended future digitalization
around the world: Leading, catching up, forging
ahead, falling behind. Naše Gospodarstvo/Our
Economy: Journal of Contemporary Issues in Economics
and Business, 68(3), 1–9. http://ng-epf.si/index.php/
ngoe/issue/view/48

Established Business Ownership (EBO)

90
80
70
60

%

50
40
30
20

0

India
Togo
China
South Africa
Tunisia
IranIndonesia
Colombia
MoroccoEgypt
Venezuela
GuatemalaBrazilPolandSerbiaSlovak RepublicHungary
Romania
LatviaGreeceCroatia
Oman
TaiwanUruguay
Chile
Puerto Rico
MexicoPanamaFranceLithuania
Switzerland
SwedenNetherlands
Austria
Germany
Republic of Korea
Spain
NorwayIsraelSlovenia
CyprusJapan
Luxembourg
Canada
Qatar
United States
United Kingdom
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates

10

Level C66

Level B

Level A

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Amr AboDraiaa
CEO of Rology (Egypt)

Creating jobs while addressing the shortageof radiology professionals
Radiologists, in their use of medical imaging, play animportant role in diagnosing and treating injuries
and diseases. However, there aren’t enough of these
professionals in many African countries. Physicians
are increasingly relying on radiology scans for theirdiagnoses, but the number of radiologists is growing
at a much slower pace. In addition, radiology has
different sub-specialties. It is very difficult for a
hospital to cover all of these sub-specialties andassure a high level quality of care for all patients.
Rology CEO Amr AboDraiaa and his colleagues are
addressing this shortage and creating jobs in theprocess. Founded in 2017, the company’s cloudbased platform provides intelligent matchmaking
between patients and remote radiologists. The
company’s main objective is to save lives by
providing a proper diagnosis to patients no matter

where they are from. Adopting the gig economy
model, Rology’s network now exceeds over 100
radiologists in addition to 50 full-time employees
working in Egypt and Kenya. Said Amr:
“We are a two-sided platform, so the more wegrow and there is need for our services, themore we create job opportunities.”
Rology was well ahead of the curve when it cameto working remotely. Therefore, when the COVID-19
pandemic impelled health care facilities to adopt
digital solutions, Rology was well positioned toaddress the demand.
“We succeeded in developing an AI algorithm
to detect COVID-19 through a CT chest scanand flag any abnormalities and high priority
cases. We also launched an AI COVID-19
detection model in X-ray scans. The Japan
International Cooperation Agency recognized
our AI innovation in the fight against the
COVID-19 pandemic, leading us to win the
Ninja Award.”

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report67

an established business if they expected to use
more digital technologies to sell their products
or services in the next six months. This question
was continued in 2022, with the results shown in
Figure 4.5.
In 26 of the 49 economies, over half of thosestarting or running a new business (Total earlystage Entrepreneurial Activity [TEA]) expected
to use more digital technologies to sell theirproducts in eight Level C economies, eight Level
B and 10 Level A economies. In other words,
there was little evidence of any association withincome. The highest levels were in Brazil, theUnited Arab Emirates, Panama, Mexico, Puerto
Rico and Chile: all in Latin America & Caribbean
except the United Arab Emirates. The lowest levels
were in France, India, Poland and Lithuania: allin Europe except India.
Established Business Ownership (EBO)
displays a similar, if slightly diluted pattern,with the highest levels of those expecting to
use more digital technology to sell being in the
United Arab Emirates, Mexico, Saudi Arabia,
Brazil and Venezuela, an interesting mix of Latin
American and Gulf economies, while the lowest
levels were in Poland, Togo, Hungary, Austria andSwitzerland: all except Togo being in Europe.

That the patterns for TEA and EBO are similar
may be expected, given that they are both subject
to the same pressures within an economy.27 What
was not expected is that the levels for both are
generally higher in Level C economies than inLevel A, although the Gulf does provide some
exceptions.
If expectations of using more digitaltechnologies to sell in the next six months are an
indicator of how prepared businesses are to face
the future, then many entrepreneurs, both newand established, look significantly ill-prepared to
face that future, especially, but not exclusively,in Europe. France, for example, has less than one
in four new entrepreneurs, and less than one inthree Established Business Owners, expecting
to use more digital technologies to sell theirproducts in the next six months. Lithuania and
Poland are not much further ahead, althoughthese cases may reflect already high levels ofdigitalization. In general, however, if European
economies are not going to be using more digitaltechnologies to sell, while new and establishedbusinesses in Latin America and the Gulf are —and given the Internet’s global reach — then it
would not be surprising to see some shifts in who
sells what to whom.

4.5 SOCIAL AND ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSIBILITIESMany of those running new or establishedbusinesses have strong social and environmental
concerns, particularly since the pandemic. Social
concerns may include access to education, health,safety, inclusiveness, housing, transportation, andquality of life at home or work. Environmental
implications can include the preservation of green
areas, reductions in the emission of pollutants
and toxic gases, selective garbage collection,and conscious consumption of water, electricity
and fuel. Such social and environmental
considerations may be weighed against and evenprioritized above profitability or growth.
To assess whether those concerns spilled over
into business strategy, the GEM APS asks thoserunning a new or established business whether
they agree that they always consider social
implications when making decisions about the
future of their business. A similar question asked
whether environmental implications are always
considered. Results from these questions areshown in Figures 4.6 and 4.7.

68

Among both new and establishedentrepreneurs there was widespread agreementthat social concerns were always consideredwhen making decisions about the future of
the business,28 with four in five entrepreneurs
agreeing — both new and established — in seven
Level C economies, six Level B, and four Level
A economies. Hence there is some evidence
that agreement declines with income level.
This is confirmed by looking at economies withthe lowest levels of agreement. Less than threeout of four new entrepreneurs agreed in 25
economies: three from Level C, six from Level B
and 16 from Level A economies. The lowest levelsof established entrepreneur agreement werein Iran (43%) and Israel (47%), out of just nine
economies where three in five or less established
27 The correlation coefficient between the TEA
proportion and the corresponding EBO proportion is0.808.
28 The correlation coefficient between the percentage of
TEA and percentage of EBO agreeing is 0.830.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportTotal early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)

Established Business Ownership (EBO)

100
90
80
70

%

60
50
40
30
20

0

MoroccoColombia
Iran
Togo
China
Egypt
South Africa
India
Venezuela
Tunisia
Indonesia
BrazilGuatemalaOman
Hungary
LatviaSlovak Republic
GreeceSerbiaCroatia
Uruguay
MexicoPolandChile
Romania
Puerto Rico
PanamaTaiwanNorwayIsraelSwedenGermanyJapan
Republic of Korea
Netherlands
Spain
Austria
CanadaSwitzerland
Lithuania
United States
CyprusFranceUnited Kingdom
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Slovenia
Luxembourg
United Arab Emirates

10

Level C

Level B

Level AFIGURE 4.6 ​“When making decisions about the future of my business, I always consider social implications” (agree, % Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity and % Established Business Ownership)
Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)

Established Business Ownership (EBO)

100
90
80
70

%

60
50
40
30
20

0

Morocco
Iran
Togo
India
South Africa
Colombia
Egypt
Indonesia
Venezuela
China
Tunisia
BrazilGuatemalaOman
Slovak Republic
LatviaGreeceSerbiaHungary
Croatia
PolandRomania
Uruguay
TaiwanMexicoPuerto Rico
Chile
PanamaIsraelGermanyJapan
SwedenNorwayRepublic of Korea
Netherlands
Austria
United States
Spain
CyprusUnited Kingdom
FranceSwitzerland
CanadaLithuania
Luxembourg
Saudi Arabia
Qatar
United Arab Emirates
Slovenia

10

Level C

Level B

Level AFIGURE 4.7 ​“When making decisions about the future of my business, I always consider environmental implications” (agree, % Total
early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity and % Established Business Ownership)
Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report69

in two established entrepreneurs agreeing: Israel
and Iran.
That so many of those starting new or runningestablished businesses consider social andenvironmental concerns when making decisions
is very positive, although those concerns may
decline as incomes rise. That less well-off
economies take these concerns seriously isperhaps not surprising, given that many of these
economies have borne the brunt of the social andenvironmental impacts of change.

entrepreneurs agreed: two Level C, one Level B
and six Level A.
Environmental concerns present a very similar
picture.29 In 19 economies — six Level C, eight
Level B and four Level A — four out of five of both
new and established entrepreneurs agreeing thatthese concerns are always considered in decisions
about the business. Five economies had less than
three in five new entrepreneurs agreeing: three
from Middle East & North Africa plus Germany
and Japan. Only two economies had less than one

4.6 ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND THE UNITED NATIONSSUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS (SDGs)
Under the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable
Development approved by the United Nations,entrepreneurship was identified as an importantmechanism to promote the achievement of the UN
SDGs for more equitable, greener, more balanced
and higher-quality development.30

FIGURE 4.8 ​Are you awareof the 17 United
Nations Sustainable
Development Goals?
(% Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity and% Established
Business Ownership)

The 17 goals included in the SDGs were
published in 2015 and have slowly been gaining
traction since. A question in the GEM APS asked
those starting new and running established

30 See, for example, Lui, Y., Samsami, M., Meshreki,
H., Pereira, F., & Schøtt, T.(2021). Sustainable
Development Goals in strategy and practice:Businesses in Colombia and Egypt. Sustainability,
13(22), 12453. doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/su132212453

29 In this case, the correlation coefficient between thepercentage of TEA and percentage of EBO agreeing is0.816.

Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)

Established Business Ownership (EBO)

70

60

50

%

40

30

20

70

Level A

NorwayCanadaSwitzerland

Spain

United Arab Emirates

Austria

Republic of Korea

FranceSlovenia

IsraelLithuania

Qatar

CyprusPolandTaiwanRomania

Slovak Republic

LatviaLevel B

Croatia

GreeceHungary

Chile

SerbiaMexicoUruguay

Togo

China

Colombia

Level CSouth Africa

India

Egypt

Tunisia

Indonesia

0Morocco10

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Swarna Shiv
Founder, Unsmudgeable (United States)

The role of education in launching acompany
Over the years, we have consistently seen that accessto quality education varies considerably across theglobe.
A great example of someone who used an
educational experience to start a new businessis Swarna Shiv. She founded Unsmudgeable, agreen permanent anti-smudge eyewear lenscoating for a lifetime of clear vision. The idea for thecompany came to fruition in October 2021 during
the first entrepreneurship class Swarna took as anundergraduate at Babson College.
“We were tasked with generating 10
startup ideas and pitching our best one.
Unsmudgeable ended up being my favourite
because it solves a personal issue.”After a semester of customer discovery throughconstructing preliminary market and feasibility
assessments in the class, Swarna decided to pursue
the idea as a startup. From there, she received
access to the best entrepreneurship programs,
pitch competitions and (most importantly)
people that Babson could offer. In its earlyphases, Unsmudgeable is becoming a materials
development company that is building its MVP
coating, expanding its team, and identifying further
vertical market integrations.

businesses if they were aware of the SDGs. This
question was optional for national teams toadminister, with 34 of the 49 APS participating
economies choosing to ask this in 2022. Of
course, this is not a random sample: thoseteams choosing to ask this question have done
so because of their perception of its relevanceto entrepreneurs in their economy. Despite this,Figure 4.8 shows that awareness of the SDGs
among those starting a new business or runningan established business was low. The highest
level of awareness among those starting a new
business was 61% in Norway and 43% in Poland,“An education can be essential toconglomerate the resources and community
necessary for an entrepreneur to execute theirventure. Essentially, without my educational
experiences at Babson, my startup would notexist.”and less than two in five everywhere else,
although with some positive association withincome level. Less than one in 10 new businessstarters were aware of the SDGs in five out of nine
Level C economies, one of 12 Level B economies
and none of 13 Level A economies.
Established Business Owners evidence a
broadly similar pattern, with more than a third of
those running an established business aware of
the SDGs in just four economies (Poland, Norway,
Romania, and China), and less than one in fiveaware in eight Level C economies, six Level B andfour Level A economies.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report71This lack of awareness is despite the highproportions of entrepreneurs, both newand established, reporting in the previous
section that they always consider social andenvironmental concerns in their decisions about
the future of the business. Substantially more

entrepreneurs appear to be considering social andenvironmental issues than those that are aware
that, in doing so, they may be helping to meetthose SDGs. The success of the United Nations
2030 Sustainable Development Goals is crucial to
the future global economy and society.

4.7 CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Individuals tend to start businesses for different
reasons across different economies and income
groups. Significantly, these motivations
increasingly include social and environmental
objectives as well as the traditional profit motive.
This bodes well for potential shifts towards more
purpose-driven companies that add value tosociety and address some of the world’s biggest
challenges according to the United Nations
Sustainable Development Goals.
Whatever the objectives, and despite thepandemic and rising prices, most of those startinga new business in 2022 did not agree that businessgrowth expectations were lower than a year
earlier. This was confirmed by a brief comparisonof those new entrepreneurs in 2022 agreeingthat growth expectations were lower than ayear earlier, with those answering the same APS
question in 2021.
When those starting or running a new businesswere asked whether they agree with four defined
motivations for starting their business, “tobuild great wealth or very high income” and “toearn a living because jobs are scarce” were the72most popular choices, although support for thelatter declined as income level increased. The
motivation “to make difference in the world”
was almost as popular, although the proportionof new entrepreneurs agreeing was generally
higher in low-income economies. The motivation“to continue a family tradition” was importantin a few specific economies, although its support
typically also fell as income level rose.
If the proportion of entrepreneurs, both newand established, expecting to use more digitaltechnologies to sell their products or services isa guide to how ready their businesses are to facean increasingly digital future, very high levels insome Latin American or Gulf economies suggest
these are much better prepared than in many
European economies.
Most economies had encouragingly high levelsof new or established entrepreneurs agreeing thatthey always considered social and environmental
issues when making decisions about the futureof their business. Rather fewer were aware thatdoing so may have kept them in line with theUnited Nations Sustainable Development Goals.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

The Impacts ofEntrepreneurial Activity

5

Stephen Hill and Maribel Guerrero

5.1 WHAT DETERMINES ENTREPRENEURIAL IMPACTS?
The question of why entrepreneurship is
important, both to society and to the economy,
was briefly addressed in Chapter 1. There is aconsensus that new businesses have an impact
by creating jobs, translating ideas into products
and services, introducing new technologies,
stimulating market competitiveness, andgenerating income and value-added in both
domestic and international markets.
The economic impacts of a new business will
be determined by a host of variables, including
turnover, capital intensity, employment, local
sourcing, export orientation, etc. The new
business is typically small, with low turnover, few
employees and local markets, and may be initiallyunprofitable. All of this may be true, but assessing
the impact of a new business in this way is to missthe point. The issue is not the current impact of
the new enterprise but rather its potential impact:
what can the business grow and develop into, andwhat will its impacts be then?
There is, unfortunately — yet obviously — noobjective way of establishing what the businesswill become, never mind what its impacts
will be. However, a number of individual andorganizational determinants of entrepreneurship
impacts can provide an important guide.31 First,

expecting to grow is usually an important precursor
to actually doing so. The Adult Population Survey(APS) asks new entrepreneurs how many people
will be working for the business in five years’
time. Many people starting a new business expect
to employ no one but themselves by then, an
expectation that is likely to be self-fulfilling. Others
expect to employ six or more people in five years’
time, which is no guarantee that they will, but
promises rather more economic impact in the
future. Similarly, many new businesses, especiallyin consumer services, replicate the activities andoutputs of existing businesses.
Second, new businesses that disrupt andtransform economies strategically are typicallythose that produce new goods and services,
often introducing innovative technologies andprocesses, as well as competing by selling tonational and international, rather than justdomestic, markets. The APS asks those startingor running a new business if they are selling any
products or services that are new, using novel
technologies or processes, and about the scope of
their customers: whether they are local, national
or international. Each will be considered in turnbecause each says something about the potential
economic impact of the new business.

5.2 ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND THE UNITED NATIONSSUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT GOALS (SDGs)
The previous chapter demonstrated that many
contemporary new businesses are motivatedto make a difference in the world, as well as by
31 In this regard, Neumann highlights the individual
determinants (e.g. motivations, ambitions,
expectations) and organizational determinants(e.g. innovativeness, degree of internationalization,
survival strategies) that shape entrepreneurshipincome and wealth. A substantial proportion of
new and established entrepreneurs explicitly
take social and environmental considerations
impact. Neumann, T. (2021). The impact ofentrepreneurship on economic, social andenvironmental welfare and its determinants: A
systematic review. Management Review Quarterly, 71(3),553–84. doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11301-020-00193-7

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report73those agreeing in the 2022 APS. A positive resultshows an increase in the proportion of new
entrepreneurs taking environmental implications
into account. Of the 38 economies answering thisquestion in both years, in 23 that proportion has
increased, the largest increases being in South
Africa, Luxembourg and Norway, but with large
decreases also evident in Morocco and Oman.
Note that the chart shows percentage pointchanges in TEA. Many of these changes are small
and unlikely to be significant.
Assessing the impacts of new enterprises
on social and environmental well-being is
an important area for future research,33 andis actively being developed by the Global
Entrepreneurship Monitor project. As noted
earlier, some first steps have been taken in theevolution of the GEM APS, with questions on
motivation introduced in the 2019 Global Report,
questions on the role of social and environmental

into account in their decision-making, and someare aware of the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs). New businesses
can assist in the achievement of the SDGs both
directly and indirectly. For instance, some social
enterprises are created to provide employment
opportunities to under-represented minorities,
feed the poor, or to directly tackle issues such as
oceanic pollution or climate change. Particularly
in Level C and B economies,32 many new
entrepreneurs are motivated by a sustainablebusiness model to address an “intention–actiongap” in the care of their local communities, butalso in order to generate value for new segmentsof eco-friendly or sustainable customers.
Some insight into recently burgeoning
environmental awareness can be gained byexamining the percentage of those startingor running new businesses who always takeenvironmental implications into account when
making decisions about the future of thatbusiness, over the two years that the GEM APS has
been asking that question. Figure 5.1 subtracts thepercentage of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA) agreeing in the 2021 APS from

FIGURE 5.1 ​The percentage ofTotal early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA)
agreeing thatthey always takeenvironmental
implication
into account in
2022, minus thatpercentage in 2021

33 See further, Vedula, S., Doblinger, C., Pacheco,
D., York, J.G., Bacq, S., Russo, M.V., & Dean, T.J.
(2022). Entrepreneurship for the public good: A
review, critique, and path forward for social andenvironmental entrepreneurship research. Academyof Management Annals, 16(1), 391–425. doi: https://doi.
org/10.5465/annals.2019.0143

32 See Figures 4.6 and 4.7 in Chapter 4.

Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey
2021, 2022

15
10
5

−5
−10
−15
−20

74

NorwayFranceLuxembourg

Republic of Korea

CyprusSaudi Arabia

CanadaSwitzerland

Spain

Slovenia

United Kingdom

IsraelSweden

Qatar

Netherlands

United StatesJapan

Germany

PanamaUruguay

Slovak Republic

Chile

Romania

PolandHungary

LatviaGreeceOman

IranSouth Africa

Croatia

Level B

United Arab Emirates

Level C

BrazilGuatemala

India

Egypt

−30

Morocco−25

Colombia% TEA

0Level A

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Fariel Salahuddin
Founder of Goats for Water (Pakistan)
Cartier Women’s Initiative Fellow, 2019

Enabling smallholder farmers to use theirproduce and livestock as currency
Sindh province, a small remote rural farming
community in Pakistan, was having issues accessing
clean water to meet hygiene and health needs.
Water was being bussed from the nearest city at
great expense, making it extremely expensive andnot available to all. A solar water pump would solve
their problem but there wasn’t enough money
for it. They could have been gifted a pump by thegovernment or an NGO — but, despite years of
waiting, their numbers weren’t large enough tomeet with NGOs’ or government KPIs.
Is it possible for communities to reimagine money tomake clean water a reality? Fariel Salahuddin asked
this question to herself during a visit to Sindh. She
recalled:“A herd of about 200 goats was coming backfrom grazing. I thought ‘Wow, that’s a lotof goats.’ The village doesn’t have cash, butmaybe they can pay in livestock.”
This is when she offered to accept goats from thiscommunity as payment for a pump. The community
exchanged 40 goats for a 2.5 hp solar water pump,and Goats for Water was born. The company works
with smallholder farmers, enabling them to buy key
assets such as solar pumps, solar home lights, microgrids and smartphones that increase the qualityof their lives and enhances their productivity andlivelihoods. Goats for Water has now worked withover 60 communities in Pakistan and is successfully
testing its model in Somalia and Nepal, having thus
far brought water and electricity to over 98,000
people.
Fariel explained:“We want to tokenize the livestock to create
a community currency that farmers can use
with enhanced affordability for goods andservices that they have struggled to acquiredue to low incomes.”

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report75considerations in decision-making appearing in
the APS for the first time in 2021, while questions
on entrepreneurial awareness of the SDGs wereadded in 2022. In addition, the GEM National
Expert Survey (NES), considered later in thisGlobal Report, explicitly asks those national
experts for their assessment of new business
impacts on the SDGs. Slowly, through GEM, apicture of the wider impacts of entrepreneurial
activity is beginning to emerge.

5.3 ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND EMPLOYMENT EXPECTATIONSFIGURE 5.2 ​Job growth
expectations
among early-stage
entrepreneurs
expecting to employ
0, 1–5 or 6 or more
people in five years’time (% adults)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

It was noted earlier that growth expectations
count. New entrepreneurs expecting to create
many new jobs are likely to have a much greater
impact than those expecting to employ no one
but themselves. Figure 5.2 shows job growth
expectations among those starting or runninga new business, divided into those expecting toemploy no additional people, those expecting tocreate, first, up to five new jobs and, second, six
jobs or more.
Figure 5.2 shows both the level of job
expectations (as a percentage of adults) and,indirectly, the share of those starting a new
business within each job expectation category(% TEA). The proportion of adults in eacheconomy both starting a new business andexpecting to employ no more people in five0 jobs

1–5 jobs

years’ time ranged from one in 50 or less in four
economies (Poland, Morocco, Greece and Cyprus)
to around one in 10 in four other economies (Togo,
Uruguay, Canada and United States). In two Level
C and two Level B economies, over half of thosestarting a new business expected to employ nomore people, which was also the case in eight
Level A economies.
At the other end of the scale, 10 economies
had more than one in 20 of their adults both
starting or running a new business and expecting
to employ an additional six or more people infive years’ time. Four of these were in Level C(Guatemala, Colombia, Brazil and Iran), four werein Level B (Panama, Chile, Uruguay and Puerto
Rico) and two in Level A (United Arab Emirates
and Qatar). The United Arab Emirates had by far

6+ jobs30% of adults 18–64

25

20

15

10

0

MoroccoChina
Egypt
Indonesia
South Africa
India
Venezuela
IranTunisia
BrazilTogo
Colombia
Guatemala
PolandGreeceTaiwanRomania
Hungary
SerbiaSlovak Republic
Oman
MexicoCroatia
LatviaPuerto Rico
Uruguay
Chile
PanamaSpain
Japan
NorwayAustria
Luxembourg
Switzerland
Slovenia
CyprusIsraelGermany
SwedenFranceQatar
Republic of Korea
Netherlands
Lithuania
United Kingdom
CanadaUnited States
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates

5

Level C76

Level B

Level A

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

2019

2020

2021

2022

80
70
60

% TEA

50
40
30
20

the highest level, with almost one in five adults
both starting or running a new business andexpecting to create six or more jobs in five years’time.
It is instructive to compare, for each economy,
the proportion of adults starting and runninga new business and expecting to employ no
additional people, to the proportion of new
entrepreneurs in the same economy expecting
to employ six or more. In seven economies — theSlovak Republic, Spain, Germany, Indonesia,
Switzerland, Oman and Sweden — there wereat least four adults starting or running a new
business and expecting to employ no more
people for every new entrepreneur expecting toemploy six or more. In these economies, total
job impacts from those new businesses are likely
to be modest. On the other hand, there were
two economies — the United Arab Emirates andPanama — with four or more times more adults
starting a new business and expecting to employ
six or more people, than starting a business andexpecting to employ no more people. Job impacts
from new businesses are likely to be higher here.
There is also the interesting question ofwhether the pandemic has impacted the job

SwedenUnited Kingdom

Israel

NorwayNetherlands

Level A

expectations of new entrepreneurs, with
one conjecture being that, if the pandemic
pushed many people into self-employment,
the proportion of new entrepreneurs expecting
to employ no more people might have risen.
Figure 5.3 shows the percentage of those startingor running a new business who expect to employ
no additional people in five years’ time for eachyear from 2019 to 2022.
Of the 32 economies that participated in
the GEM APS in all years between 2019 and2022, there are 13 in which the proportion of
those starting or running a new business who
expected to employ no more people in five
years’ time fell, most strongly in Poland (from
40% in 2019 to 15% in 2022), Brazil (54% to31%) and the Republic of Korea (38% to 20%).
Conversely, there were 19 economies in whichthat proportion increased, with the strongest
increases in the Slovak Republic (from 40% in2019 to 71% in 2022), Germany (41% to 69%)
and Oman (48% to 71%). So overall some slightindications are evident of an increase in the
proportions of new entrepreneurs expecting toemploy no more people, especially in Northern
Europe.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

CanadaSpain

Germany

Slovenia

United States

Republic of Korea

Switzerland

Cyprus

Qatar

Luxembourg

Saudi Arabia

Oman

Slovak Republic

PolandLatviaGreeceChile

PanamaBrazilCroatia

Level B

United Arab Emirates

Level C

India

Egypt

MoroccoIranColombia

0

Guatemala10

FIGURE 5.3 ​The percentageof those startingor running a new
business andexpecting to employ
no additional people
in five years’ time(% Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Surveys
2019–2022

77

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Ken Gordon
President and CEO, Quantum Silicon Inc. (Canada)Starting a business to seize on an
opportunity
Individuals start businesses for a number of different
reasons. Some are motivated to make a difference inthe world. Others aspire to build great wealth or earna very high income. In some cases, individuals resort
to entrepreneurship because jobs are scarce or tocontinue a family tradition.
Ken Gordon, President and CEO of the Canadianbased company Quantum Silicon, started hisbusiness because “It was a compelling opportunitythat just had to be taken up.”
Quantum Silicon harnesses proprietary single-atomsilicon quantum dots to create high-speed quantum
accelerators that are at least 100 times more energyefficient than their transistor-based equivalents. The
company offers a suite of Quantum Acceleratorsthat provide fast, energy-efficient, secure solutions
for rapidly growing markets such as cybersecurity
and quantum sensing.
The origins of the company date back to 2012
when Ken was a partner with a Canadian venture
fund. In the process of exploring new deals,
he met Robert Wolkow, a physics professor at
the University of Alberta and inventor of thesingle-atom silicon quantum dot (SQD). The
professor explained to Ken how patterns ofthese SQDs can be used to replace transistors incomputing circuits, making them faster and moreenergy-efficient. Behind the SQD technology
lay a unique atomically precise manufacturing
technology.
At these early stages, the SQD technology had been
patented and some rough ideas existed about how
to use it to make energy-efficient fast electronics.
Manufacturing was complex and slow, requiringconstant human supervision at every stage. Ken’s
experience, however, led him to believe that it
was important to confront the market as early as

78

possible so that the development process could lead
to useful products. Said Ken:
“It was becoming clear that thesemiconductor industry was facing the endof the Moore’s Law path that had guided its
development for half a century. That path wasending because of the energy inefficiency of
the transistor.”
The challenge was bringing to market a newtechnology using silicon, which most people would
have thought had been thoroughly investigated andfully developed in a mature and complex industry.
Ken was up for the challenge because: “If successful,the payoff would be enormous.”
To date, Quantum Silicon Inc. has automated its
atomically precise manufacturing technology,
making it scalable, and has designed its first
products: a Quantum Random Number Generator
and a Quantum Magnetometer. Ken says:“The products are all-silicon and all-electronic.
Competing products use exotic materials
like nitrogen vacancy diamond and photonic
sources of randomness.”

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report5.4 ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INNOVATIONAs noted earlier, the potential contributionsof entrepreneurship include turning ideas
into products or services, expanding choices,
introducing new technologies or processes,
and improving efficiency. Product or process
innovation can be important characteristics
of high-impact new entrepreneurship, so the
GEM APS asks those starting or running a new
business if they are introducing any products
or services that are new to the area, new to thecountry or new to the world, alongside a similar
question about the use of any new technologies
or processes. Of course, in a small economy,
their “area” and their “country” may be virtuallysynonymous. As it turns out, innovation in
new entrepreneurship is much more likely
to involve applying product or process ideas
developed elsewhere than introducing products
or technologies that are new to the world. This
diffusion of ideas is important in improving
quality and efficiency.
Figure 5.4 shows the proportion of adults
in each participating economy who wereboth starting or running a new business andintroducing products or services that were new
to their area, new to their country or new to theworld. Of the 49 economies, 11 had fewer than one
in 100 adults starting or running a new businessintroducing any goods and services at least new totheir area, while 45 economies had less than one
in 20 adults doing the same.34 Put another way,
there were just four economies where more than
one in 20 new entrepreneurs were introducing
any goods or services that were at least new totheir area. Two of these economies were in Level
C (Guatemala and Colombia), while two were in

34 Once again, many of these numbers are very low, so
care must be taken not to attach undue significanceto small differences. For example, suppose an APS
with a sample size of 2,000 reveals a level of TEA
of 10%. This implies 200 adults starting or runninga new business. If 1% of those was introducing a
product that was new to that country, that is just two
entrepreneurs. It would be unwise to assert that, if
three entrepreneurs were doing the same in anothereconomy, new product innovation was 50% higher
than in the first economy.

FIGURE 5.4 ​The proportion of
adults starting a
new business withproducts or services
that were new totheir area, new totheir country, or
new to the world
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

New to their area

New to their country

New to the world

16
14% of adults 18–64

12
10
8
6
4

0

MoroccoEgypt
China
Indonesia
Togo
South Africa
India
Tunisia
Venezuela
BrazilIranColombia
Guatemala
PolandTaiwanGreeceSerbiaRomania
Hungary
Oman
LatviaSlovak Republic
MexicoCroatia
Puerto Rico
Uruguay
PanamaChile
Spain
NorwayAustria
IsraelSwedenLithuania
Slovenia
Japan
Cyprus
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Luxembourg
Republic of Korea
France
Qatar
Netherlands
Germany
Saudi Arabia
CanadaUnited States
United Arab Emirates

2

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Level A

79

New to their area

New to their country

New to the world

12

10% of adults 18–64

8

6

4

0

MoroccoChina
Egypt
Indonesia
Togo
South Africa
India
Venezuela
Tunisia
Iran
BrazilColombia
Guatemala
PolandSerbiaRomania
GreeceTaiwanOman
Hungary
LatviaSlovak Republic
MexicoCroatia
Uruguay
Puerto Rico
PanamaChile
NorwaySpain
Austria
IsraelLuxembourg
SwedenRepublic of Korea
Switzerland
United Kingdom
Lithuania
Japan
CyprusSlovenia
France
Qatar
Netherlands
Germany
CanadaSaudi Arabia
United States
United Arab Emirates

2

Level CFIGURE 5.5 ​The proportion of
adults starting a
new business withany technologies
or procedures thatare either new totheir area, new totheir country or
new to the world
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

80

Level B

Level B (Panama and Chile). There were none in
Level A.
In terms of new entrepreneurs introducing
products or services new to their country (alsoFigure 5.4), there were 31 economies in which thisrate was less than 1%, and just seven economies
where this rate exceeded 2%. None of the latter
were in Level C, four were in Level B (Puerto
Rico, Uruguay, Chile and Panama) and three inLevel A (United Arab Emirates, United States andCanada). Finally, starting a new business andintroducing any products or services that are new
to the world is very rare indeed, reported by lessthan 1% of adults in 45 of the 49 economies. The
exceptions were Puerto Rico, the United States,
the United Arab Emirates and Chile, with thelatter highest at just 2.6% of adults.
Those new entrepreneurs using newtechnologies or procedures present a
now familiar picture (Figure 5.5). Note thesimilarities between Figure 5.4 and Figure 5.5.

Level A

Within each income group, more or less thesame economies recur at the top and bottom.
Within income Level C, the three economies
scoring lowest in terms of the percentage ofadults starting or running a new businessand introducing any new products or services(Figure 5.4) were Morocco, Egypt and China; fornew technologies (Figure 5.5), it was the same
three. In Level C, the highest for new products
were Guatemala, Columbia and Iran; for new
technologies, it was Guatemala, Columbia andBrazil. The other income groups were a little
more diverse, but not much. Hence there is ahigh degree of correlation between the two:the economies in which a new business is most
likely to be introducing new products are moreor less the same in which a new business ismost likely to be using new technologies orprocedures. It would not be difficult to combine
the two figures to produce a league table of new
business innovation within each income group.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report5.5 ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND COMPETITIVENESS35
In the 2019 APS, GEM introduced new questions
about the scope of a business’s customers,
i.e. whether they will have customers within
their local area, only within their own country,
and whether they will have customers outside of
their country. This customer scope is important,because having customers beyond the local area/
country brings revenue into that area or country,with what can be significant spillover effects onother businesses and incomes.
Figure 5.6 shows, for each economy, the levelof TEA, and those within this that will havecustomers only within their local area, only within
their country and those that will have customers
abroad. Again, note that, in small economies like
35 Guerrero et al. (2016) found a bi-directional
relationship between entrepreneurship andregional competitiveness, as well as some insights
on the endogenous process of wealth creation ineconomies. For further details, Guerrero, M., Urbano,D., & Fayolle, A. (2016). Entrepreneurial activity andregional competitiveness: evidence from European
entrepreneurial universities. The Journal of Technology
Transfer, 41(1), 105–131.

Luxembourg, Israel or Cyprus, local and national
can imply more or less the same space.
Figure 5.6 shows that the highest levels of
local-only customers for those starting or runninga new business were in Level C, with the clear
exception of Chile in Level B, where over 20% of
adults were starting or running a new businesswith only local customers, followed by Guatemala
at 15% and Uruguay, Brazil, Togo and Saudi
Arabia, each around 10% of adults. Saudi Arabia
is the only high-income economy with this level of
local-only customers, with the next high-income
economies being the United States and Canada,both with around 6%. Twelve economies had
less than one in 50 adults starting or running abusiness with only local customers, four fromLevel B and eight from Level A. The lowest of all
was Luxembourg, a small country where having
only local customers could be very limiting.
In 2022, relatively few adults were startingor running a business expecting internationalcustomers. None of the Level C economies had
at least one in 20 adults starting a businessand expecting international customers, a level

FIGURE 5.6 ​The level of
Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA) andthose within thisthat will have only
customers in theirlocal area, only
within their country
and those that will
have internationalcustomers (% adults)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Local only

National

International30% of adults 18–64

25

20

15

10

0

MoroccoChina
Egypt
Indonesia
South Africa
India
Venezuela
IranTunisia
BrazilTogo
Colombia
Guatemala
PolandGreeceTaiwanRomania
Slovak RepublicHungary
SerbiaOman
MexicoCroatia
LatviaPuerto Rico
Uruguay
Chile
PanamaSpain
Japan
NorwayAustria
Luxembourg
Switzerland
Slovenia
CyprusSwedenGermany
IsraelFranceQatar
Republic of Korea
Netherlands
Lithuania
United Kingdom
CanadaUnited States
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates

5

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Level A81

ENTREPRENEUR HIGHLIGHT

Rasha Rady
Co-founder and CEO of Chefaa (Egypt)
Cartier Women’s Initiative Fellow, 2020

Delivering for patients while working indifferent environments
Chronically ill patients in Egypt fill two millionprescriptions each month. Yet, despite the highprescription volume, Egyptian pharmacy systems
are not tech-enabled. The MENA region has thehighest incidence of non-communicable diseases
globally and medication shortages are common.
What is the point of going to the doctor if you don’t
get the right medicine?
This sentiment was captured in a dialogue between
Dr Rasha Rady and her friend Doaa Aref. Following
surgery, Doaa asked: “Do you realize I can order
anything online, except the medication I need tostay alive?”
Dr Rady knew from her work with chronically illpatients that many people were experiencing thissame frustration. In response, Dr Rady and Doaa
created Chefaa, a digital platform that helps chronic
patients order, schedule and refill prescriptions
regardless of location or income. Patients enterprescriptions on an AI-powered, GPS-enabledapplication which locates the nearest pharmacy. The
prescription is then ordered, delivered and refilledusing a companion professional app.
Launched in 2017, Chefaa was well positioned toaddress the disruptions and health care needs
resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr Rady
explained:“With chronic patients being at highest risk
amid the global COVID-19 crisis, staying at
home was their only option and they had
to explore digital solutions. Chefaa aligned
perfectly to this need.”“Working from home had a positive impact on
the Chefaa team.”
After COVID-19 pandemic restrictions were lifted,
some employees returned to the office while others
worked from home.
“As per our experience, a 100% workingfrom-home policy didn’t have the same result.
We found that a healthy work environment
and interdepartmental interactions of
employees creates a strong bond resulting in
more productive outcomes.”

In addition to patients, the Chefaa team was alsoable to adapt, pivoting operations to a remote work
set-up. Said Dr Rady:82

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Reportattained by only three Level B economies (Croatia,
Latvia and Puerto Rico, all with just over 6%).
Meanwhile, more than one in eight United ArabEmirates adults were new entrepreneurs that
anticipate international customers, a level morethan twice that of the United States (5%).

5.6 ENTREPRENEURSHIP AND INTERNATIONAL REVENUE
The previous section has already demonstrated
the relative paucity of international customers for
those starting or running a new business. Having
international customers is a matter of policy
and strategic practice: does the public policy
framework in the economy encourage exports,
is foreign currency freely available to exchange,
and are there tariffs and duties that mean extra
costs that could represent an entry barrier?
Economies are more likely to trade with eachother if they share the same language, or haveaspects of culture in common, while exports by
new businesses may be more prevalent in smaller
economies with large neighbours.
GEM defines a new business as exportintensive if 25% of revenue or more is expected
to come from overseas. This may be direct, as
in exported goods or services, or indirectly,
such as purchases by tourists or visitors. Those
identified in the GEM APS as starting or runninga new business are asked what proportion of
their annual sales revenue comes from outside
their country. The results for 2022 are shown in
Figure 5.7. Note that this chart shows results as apercentage of TEA rather than the percentage ofadults, and is therefore not directly comparable tothe previous charts in this chapter.
Of the 13 Level C economies, only one (South
Africa) had 10% or more of its new entrepreneurs
anticipating a quarter of its revenue comingfrom outside the country, compared to six
economies in Level B and 18 in Level A. The fivelowest proportions of new entrepreneurs withthis anticipation were all from Level C (China,
Brazil, India and Egypt) plus Level B Chile, while
three of the five highest proportions were fromLevel A (United Arab Emirates, Luxembourg
and Slovenia), plus Level B Latvia and Croatia.
All except the United Arab Emirates were from
Europe.

FIGURE 5.7 ​The percentage ofTotal early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA)
anticipating 25%
or more of revenue
from outside
their country
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

40
35
30

% TEA

25
20
15
10

0

China
Brazil
India
Egypt
Iran
Venezuela
Indonesia
MoroccoColombia
GuatemalaTunisia
Togo
South Africa
Chile
PanamaPolandMexicoUruguay
Oman
SerbiaTaiwanPuerto Rico
Hungary
Romania
Slovak Republic
GreeceCroatia
LatviaRepublic of Korea
Saudi Arabia
Japan
NorwayQatar
Spain
United Kingdom
FranceSwitzerland
United States
Lithuania
SwedenIsraelCanadaCyprusGermany
Netherlands
Austria
Slovenia
Luxembourg
United Arab Emirates

5

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Level A

83

However, high proportions of new
entrepreneurs expecting a quarter or more ofrevenue from outside their country may not imply
high proportions among the adult population.
Relatively low levels of new entrepreneurship inthese five economies scoring high in Figure 5.7means that only two had 3% or more of its adults
starting or running a new business that expected
a quarter or more revenue from outside theircountry. By far the highest percentage of adults
starting or running a business and having suchexpectations was in the United Arab Emirates at
9%, almost three times the next highest (Latvia).
Another interesting question is whether new
entrepreneurs turned outwards as a result of thepandemic, seeking new customers outside of
their country, or whether they turned inwards,
focusing on domestic customers. For thepercentage of new entrepreneurs anticipating atleast a quarter of revenue coming from outside
their country, a brief analysis of 2019–2022
data showed very little change, with just one
economy increasing its proportion each year(the Netherlands, up from 12% of TEA in 2019 to
22% in 2022). Most economies saw little change,
although at least four appeared to have turned
inwards, with falls in Saudi Arabia (from 26%
in 2019 to 5% in 2022), Egypt (10% to 2%), theUnited Kingdom (20% to 13%) and Switzerland(27% to 15%)

5.7 CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS
Most governments see the encouragement of
new entrepreneurship as a major policy objective
because of the contribution new businesses
can make, not just to jobs, incomes and valueadded, but increasingly to addressing social andenvironmental concerns. The GEM APS is evolving
to address the impacts of new businesses onthese issues, including their economic and social
contribution to the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs). Recent evidence
suggests that new entrepreneurs are increasingly
taking environmental implications into account intheir decision-making.
New businesses are particularly important, notjust for what they offer now but especially for theirhigh-growth potential. While there is no objective
method of predicting such potential impact, here
GEM provides a number of useful indicators. The
first impact indicator is anticipated jobs. In 12 of
the 49 GEM-participating economies in 2022, overhalf of those starting or running a new businessexpected to employ no more people in five years’
time. Conversely, 10 economies had more than 5%of their adults starting a business and expecting
to add six or more jobs in five years’ time. Seven
were in Latin America & Caribbean, and threewere in the Middle East. None were in Europe orNorth America. Given current socio-economic
conditions, GEM data reveal an optimistic labour
market signal in this impact measure. In general,most of the adults who have created a new
business across the participant countries in 2022show an aspiration to grow in the next five years
by creating more jobs. An evolutionary analysis

84of those starting or running a new business who
expected to employ no more people in five years’time — in the 32 economies that participated in
the APS in all years 2019–2022 — provided someinsights into risky or conservative strategies
adopted due to the influence of external shocks(pandemic or high inflation rates) on the fixed
costs of creating a new job.
Alongside jobs, the second impact indicatorof new businesses is in the application of new
ideas: that is, innovation in products and/or
processes. The APS showed that, in 2022, bothof these were very much minority activities
among those starting new businesses, albeit
with a high degree of correlation between
product and process innovation. Very few new
businesses were introducing any products,
services, processes or procedures that were new
to the world. Considering high R&D costs andcurrent inflation rates, the GEM project reveals
some differentiation in these impact measures.
Relatively few individuals who have created a
new business across the participant countries in
2022 show an orientation to innovate as an entry
strategy.
The third impact indicator is having
international customers, bringing resources into
the economy and generating further business.
GEM defines a high-export orientation businessas one that anticipates 25% or more of its revenue
coming from outside the country. In the 2022 GEM
APS, 15 economies had more than one in six of
new entrepreneurs anticipating a quarter or moreof their revenue from outside of their country.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Nine of these were Level A economies (sevenfrom Europe plus Canada and the United ArabEmirates), three Level B (all from Europe) and just
one Level C (South Africa). Directly or indirectly,
this GEM impact indicator provides some insights
into how those who have created new businesses
in 2022 are stimulating competitiveness in both
domestic and international markets based on
their market segmentation strategy in current
socio-economic conditions.
In summary, among new businesses, highjob expectations and high export orientation
showed rather more potential impacts than
any focus on product or process innovation.

It is difficult to assess whether this is a productof the particular circumstances of 2022, in a
post-pandemic, high-inflation global economy
with continuing unresolved conflicts. It also isclear that many new businesses have much togain from developing new customers beyond
their own borders. Assuming that governments
are interested in promoting high-growth,ambitious entrepreneurs and then capturing
their potential impacts,36 GEM trends can be
useful for introducing institutional reforms,
policy frameworks and specific programs related
to labour market conditions, R&D investment andinternationalization strategies.

36 According to Darnihamedani and Block (p. 1), on
average, flexibility-enhancing reforms lead to higher
growth ambitions yet they are particularly favoured byestablished and imitative entrepreneurs; by contrast,
stability-enhancing reforms lead to higher growthambitions of new and innovative entrepreneurs.
Darnihamedani, P., & Block, J.H. (2022). Institutional
reforms and entrepreneurial growth ambitions.
Academy of Management Proceedings, 2022(1),p. 13726). doi: https://doi.org/10.5465/AMBPP.2022.153

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report85

6

All Kinds of Entrepreneurs

Stephen Hill and Przemysław Zbierowski

6.1 INTRODUCTION
One question considered in Chapter 2 waswhether anyone can become an entrepreneur. The
answer was: yes — becoming an entrepreneur is
not dependent on having a particular background,or being a specific age, being a particular gender,or having a given level of education. Yet, althoughstarting a business is, in principle, open to all,and all can succeed or fail in this endeavour, inpractice starting a business is more prevalent inparticular social groups, including those definedby gender, age and education. The downsideof this prevalence is that it implies that someother groups are missing out by being underrepresented in terms of entrepreneurship. Thismeans that not only do some individuals loseout by not starting businesses, but that society
as a whole misses out by not having the jobs andincomes those businesses could have provided.
It is important that all members of society see
people like themselves starting and succeedingwith new businesses, but the likelihood of thishappening may vary considerably by group.
This chapter will examine these prevalences,including gender differences, in the level ofentrepreneurship by economy. This has been arecurring theme in recent Global Reports: thisone will include a brief assessment of whether
the pandemic has impacted the entrepreneurial
gender gap. A recent GEM Women’s
Entrepreneurship Report37 suggested that, by
taking the major role in caring for relatives
and in homeschooling, women have beendisproportionately impacted by the pandemic,
and therefore the entrepreneurial gender gap
is likely to have widened. Additionally, women
entrepreneurs are over-represented in runningbusinesses that require direct contact with thecustomer, hence were more adversely impacted by

37 GEM (Global Entrepreneurship Monitor) (2021). GEM
2021/22 Women’s Entrepreneurship Report: From
Crisis to Opportunity. London: GEM. https://www.
gemconsortium.org/report/gem-202122-womensentrepreneurship-report-from-crisis-to-opportunity

86

lockdowns.38 This is an empirical question, andthis chapter will take some tentative first steps
towards addressing it.
Differences in the level of entrepreneurial
participation between two groups can bemeasured and assessed in two ways. The first is
the absolute gap, or the proportion of adults in
one group starting or running a new business,minus the equivalent proportion in another group.
The second is the relative gap, or the proportion of
adults starting or running a new business in one
group, divided by the proportion doing the samein the other group. Both measures are important,and both will be considered in this chapter. It isalso important to keep in mind that overall levelsof Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)
can vary considerably across economies, and thatbetween-economy differences may be many times
larger than any between-group differences within
an economy. An individual selected at random inan economy with a high level of TEA is more likely
to be starting a business than an individual in a
low-TEA economy, regardless of gender, age or
education.

38 Stephan, U., Zbierowski, P., Pérez-Luño, A., Wach,
D., Wiklund, J., Alba Cabañas, M., Barki, E., Benzari,A., Bernhard-Oettel, C., Boekhorst, J., Dash, A.,
Efendic, A., Eib, C., Hanard, P.-J., Iakovleva, T.,
Kawakatsu, S., Khalid, S., Leatherbee, M., Li, J.,
Parker, S.K., Qu, J., Rosati, F., Sahasranamam, S.,
Salusse, M.A.Y., Sekiguchi, T., Thomas, N., Torres,O., Tran, M.H., Ward, M.K., Williamson, A.J., &Zahid, M.M. (2022). Act or wait-and-see? Adversity,
agility, and entrepreneur wellbeing across countries
during the COVID-19 pandemic. Entrepreneurship
Theory and Practice. advanced online publication:
https://doi.org/10.1177/10422587221104820;
Stephan, U., Zbierowski, P., and Hanard, P.J. (2020).
Entrepreneurship and Covid-19: Challenges andopportunities. An assessment of the short andlong-term consequences for UK small business.
London: King’s College London. https://www.kcl.
ac.uk/business/assets/PDF/research-papers/countryreport-uk-entrepreneurship-and-covid-19-challengesand-opportunities-an-assessment-of-the-short-andlong-term-consequences-for-uk-small-businesses.pdf

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report6.2 THE ENTREPRENEURIAL GENDER GAP
Figure 6.1 shows the level of male and female TEA
across the 49 GEM Adult Population Survey (APS)
participating economies in 2022.39 Male TEA
continues to be more prevalent than female TEA
across most economies, although there were four
economies in which the female TEA rate exceededthat of men: Togo, Indonesia, Poland and Qatar.
In Figure 6.1 there are seven economies inwhich one in five women, or more, were starting or
running a new business (three from 13 in income
Level A, three from 15 Level B and one from 21 Level
A economies), with the highest levels in Guatemala
and Colombia. But there are also eight economies
in which less than one in 20 women was doing thesame (two Level C, three Level B and three Level A).
The lowest levels of female new entrepreneurshipwere in Poland, Morocco and Greece.
There were 11 economies in which male newentrepreneurship exceeded one in five, and justone economy (Poland) in which this was lessthan one in 20. The absolute entrepreneurial
39 The correlation coefficient between female TEA andmale TEA is O.939, implying that female TEA would bea good predictor of male TEA (and vice versa).

gender gap (male minus female) exceeded sevenpercentage points in five economies: four from
Europe (Serbia, Lithuania, Croatia and Latvia),
plus the United Arab Emirates.
Established Business Ownership (EBO)
is typically more male-dominated than new
entrepreneurship, which could suggest thatfemale entrepreneurship is a more recent
phenomenon than male entrepreneurship, or thatwomen-owned businesses have lower survival
rates than those owned by men,40 although
the association between male and female EBO
is rather less than for TEA.41 Levels of EBO bygender are set out in Figure 6.2.

40 There is evidence that the lower work experience of
women entrepreneurs might lead to lower survival
rates, while lower salaries of women entrepreneurs
prior to entry may translate into financial constraints.
See Boden Jr, R.J., & Nucci, A.R. (2000). On the survival
prospects of men’s and women’s new businessventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 15(4), 347–62.
doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(98)00004-4
41 The correlation coefficient between female EBO andmale EBO is 0.765, still positive but much weaker thanfor TEA.

FIGURE 6.1 ​Levels of Total earlystage Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA) by
gender (% women,% men)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

TEA female

TEA male

35

30

% TEA

25

20

15

10

0

Morocco
Egypt
China
South Africa
Indonesia
India
Iran
Tunisia
Venezuela
BrazilTogo
Colombia
Guatemala
PolandGreeceTaiwanSerbiaRomania
Hungary
Croatia
Slovak Republic
LatviaOman
MexicoPuerto Rico
Uruguay
PanamaChile
Japan
NorwayCyprusLuxembourg
Slovenia
Spain
Austria
Switzerland
IsraelSwedenGermany
FranceRepublic of Korea
Lithuania
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Qatar
CanadaSaudi Arabia
United States
United Arab Emirates

5

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Level A

87

EBO female

EBO male

25

20

% EBO

15

10

0

Egypt
MoroccoSouth Africa
Venezuela
China
Iran
Colombia
Tunisia
Indonesia
BrazilIndia
GuatemalaTogo
MexicoSerbiaCroatia
Oman
Puerto Rico
PanamaSlovak Republic
Uruguay
Hungary
TaiwanChile
Romania
LatviaPolandGreeceQatar
FranceGermany
United Arab Emirates
SwedenNorwayLuxembourg
IsraelCyprusJapan
United Kingdom
Netherlands
CanadaLithuania
Austria
Slovenia
Spain
United States
Switzerland
Saudi Arabia
Republic of Korea

5

Level CFIGURE 6.2 ​Levels of Established
Business Ownership(EBO) by gender(% women, % men)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

88

Level B

There are five economies in which more womenthan men own established businesses (Venezuela,
Indonesia and Togo, all Level C, plus Israel andSaudi Arabia from Level A), but margins are
small. There were also six economies in which theproportion of men owning established businesses
exceeded that of women by seven percentage
points or more: Iran, Tunisia, Brazil, the Republicof Korea, Latvia and Brazil.
In four economies the new entrepreneur
relative gender gap was 0.5 or less, implyingthat in these economies there were at least two
men starting or running a new business forevery woman doing the same. These economies
were Egypt, Japan, Serbia and Cyprus. Greece,
Norway and Slovenia are not far behind. In thoseeconomies there is clear evidence that womenare missing out on opportunities to start new
businesses, and that both they and their wider
economies are poorer as a result.
Conversely, there were 17 of 49 economies,
across all income groups, where the EBO relative
gender gap was less than 0.5, implying two or
more men owning an established businesses forevery established business owned by a woman,
including in Morocco and Iran, where there are atleast four men owning an established business forLevel Aevery woman doing the same. There were also fiveeconomies with more women owning establishedbusinesses than men: Indonesia, Togo, Venezuela,
Israel and Saudi Arabia.
Figure 6.3 compares the new entrepreneur
relative gender gap (female % TEA divided bymale % TEA), with the EBO relative gender gap(female % EBO divided by male % EBO) for
GEM-participating economies in 2022.
Overall, the relative gender gap forownership of established businesses tends
to be smaller than the relative gender gap for
new entrepreneurs (34 out of 49 economies)suggesting, as noted above, either that greater
equality between genders starting new
businesses is a recent phenomenon that has
yet to work its way into established businesses,or that businesses started by women may
have a lower rate of transition into establishedbusinesses than those started by men.
While in most economies the gender gap issmaller among owners of established than of
new businesses, there are some examples where
it is extremely unfavourable for women. In fiveeconomies, all in the Middle East and North
Africa (Morocco, Iran, Tunisia, Oman, Qatar),
the relative gender gap among Established

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

0.0

Egypt

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

NorwayLevel A

Israel

Qatar

Spain

United States

CanadaSwitzerland

Saudi Arabia

United Kingdom

United Arab Emirates

Level B

SwedenGermany

Luxembourg

Netherlands

Republic of Korea

Slovenia

2022

CyprusJapan

PolandOman

MexicoChile

Puerto Rico

Slovak Republic

PanamaTaiwanLatviaCroatia

GreeceIndia

GuatemalaColombia

South Africa

BrazilChina

IranLevel C

Egypt
Morocco
Iran
China
Tunisia
BrazilSouth Africa
Colombia
Venezuela
Guatemala
India
Togo
Indonesia
SerbiaGreeceCroatia
LatviaTaiwanHungary
Romania
PanamaSlovak Republic
Puerto Rico
Uruguay
Chile
MexicoOman
PolandJapan
CyprusLithuania
NorwaySlovenia
Republic of Korea
Netherlands
Luxembourg
Germany
SwedenFranceIsraelUnited Arab Emirates
United Kingdom
Saudi Arabia
Switzerland
CanadaAustria
United States
Spain
Qatar

0.0

Morocco

Ratio

Ratio

TEA
EBO

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

Level AFIGURE 6.3 ​Relative gender gaps for new businesses (female % TEA/male % TEA) and for established businesses(female % EBO/male % EBO)

Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

2019

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

FIGURE 6.4 ​The relative entrepreneurial gender gap (female Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)/male TEA), 2022 and 2019

Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2019, 2022

89

Business Owners is twice as big as among thosestarting or running a new business. On theother hand, there are 15 economies in which
the gender gap narrows with the time spent
running a business, including Venezuela, Israel
and Saudi Arabia, where a majority of men
among startup entrepreneurs and new businessowners converts to a majority of women runningestablished businesses. In some countries more
support is needed to aid women entrepreneurs
to navigate through the most difficult phase ofbusiness activity.
Another important question is whether
the pandemic has had any impact on theentrepreneurial gender gap. The introduction
to this chapter conjectured that women’s
entrepreneurship was more likely tohave been adversely affected than men’s
entrepreneurship because women werelikely to have taken the greater part of theburden of working, caring and schooling from
home, while women business owners arealso over-represented in customer-oriented
services which makes their businesses
vulnerable in lockdowns. If this was thecase, then the relative entrepreneurial
gender gap will have increased and the ratioof female new entrepreneurship to malenew entrepreneurship (female % TEA/male% TEA) will have fallen. Figure 6.4 shows thisrelative gender gap for the 38 economies thatparticipated in the GEM APS in both 2022
(post-pandemic) and 2019 (pre-pandemic).
In 17 of the 38 economies, the ratio of female
to male entrepreneurship fell between 2019and 2022, consistent with the conjecture above,
but in 21 of the 38 economies that ratio had
increased, contradicting the conjecture. Overall,this limited evidence does not support theassertion that women’s new entrepreneurshiphas declined relative to that of men over theperiod of the pandemic. The largest increases
were in India and Oman, while the largest falls
were in Saudi Arabia and Greece.

6.3 THE ENTREPRENEURIAL AGE GAP
The relationship between the age of the individual
and the propensity of that individual to bea new entrepreneur is likely to be complex.
Younger adults tend to have less knowledge
and experience, smaller networks, fewer
resources and fewer skills than older people.
On the other hand, they may have more energy,
enthusiasm and drive, less to give up in termsof an established career and high salary, andless to lose because they may not yet have tosupport a family, pay a mortgage, etc. They may
be more familiar with current trends, and withthe application potential of new technologies.
Perhaps most importantly, like the novice taking
up a sport such as golf or skiing, they don’t yet
know what they can’t do.
Older people may have more experience,
greater resources including networks andknowledge, and greater awareness of market
opportunities. However, they also may havemore to lose, and be more aware of their own
limitations.
Ultimately, whether young people are moreor less likely to be starting a business than older
people is essentially an empirical question. Afterenquiring whether the individual is actively
engaged in starting or running a new business,90

the GEM APS asks the age of the respondent.
Those identified as starting or running a new
business can then be grouped by age: in this caseinto a younger age group (adults aged 18–34) andan older age group (aged 35–64), and a TEA rate
calculated for each. Figure 6.5 shows the results,
for the 49 GEM economies in 2022.
For the younger age group, there were seveneconomies with over a quarter of adults starting or
running a new business, including five from Latin
America & Caribbean, plus the United States andTogo. The highest rates were in Guatemala (35%)
and Uruguay (32%). In the same age group there
were 17 economies with less than one in 10 adults
starting or running a new business, with thelowest rates in Poland (3%), Greece, Morocco and
Norway (each 5%).
In the older (35–64 years) age group, there
were just four economies with more than one infour starting or running a new business (three
from Latin America & Caribbean) plus the United
Arab Emirates. The highest rates were in Chile,
Colombia and Panama (each 27%). However in
27 out of 49 economies the rate of 35–49-yearolds starting or running a business was less than
one in 10. The lowest rates were in Poland (1%),
Morocco (3%) and China (4%). In fact, in Poland,

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportAdults aged 18–34

Adults aged 35–64

40
35
30

% TEA

25
20
15
10

0

MoroccoIndonesia
Egypt
China
South Africa
India
Tunisia
Venezuela
IranBrazilTogo
Colombia
Guatemala
PolandGreeceTaiwanRomania
Hungary
Oman
Slovak Republic
SerbiaMexicoLatviaCroatia
Puerto Rico
Chile
PanamaUruguay
NorwaySpain
Japan
Luxembourg
Switzerland
Austria
Israel
Qatar
Republic of Korea
FranceSwedenCyprusSlovenia
Germany
United Kingdom
Netherlands
Lithuania
Saudi Arabia
CanadaUnited Arab Emirates
United States

5

Level C

most of the overall TEA is therefore generated by
the younger generation of entrepreneurs.
Hence there is strong evidence that adults inthe younger age group were more likely to be
starting or running a new business than older
adults. This is confirmed by the TEA rate foryounger adults exceeding that of older adults in
35 of the 49 economies. Keep in mind, however,that there was strong positive association between

Level B

Level A

both rates, so that between-country differences
are likely to strongly outweigh between-groupdifferences. Nevertheless, there are clear
indications that older people are not startingas many new businesses as they could. This is
an area where policy changes to encourage andsupport older people into new businesses could
have a substantial impact on the overall rate of
new business formation.
42

FIGURE 6.5 ​The level of
Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA) for
adults aged 18–34
and for those aged
35–64 (% of adults
in each age group)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

6.4 THE ENTREPRENEURIAL GRADUATION GAP
Those taking part in the GEM APS are asked about
their highest level of educational attainment.
This information can be combined with thatfrom questions about starting or running a new
business, in order to calculate a TEA rate for both
graduates43 and non-graduates.
Graduates may have an advantage in starting a
new business in terms of confidence, training inopportunity recognition, knowledge and accessto networks,44 but, given that graduates typicallyearn more than non-graduates, they may also
have less incentive to start a new business. So
it is not obvious whether, within a particular
economy, graduates or non-graduates are more
likely to be starting a new business. Once more,
the question is essentially empirical.

42 Correlation coefficient = 0.848.
43 Those reporting in the APS that their highest levelof educational achievement was a post-secondary
qualification, usually a bachelor degree or higher, areclassified here as graduates.

44 Sahasranamam, S., & Nandakumar, M.K. (2020).
Individual capital and social entrepreneurship:Role of formal institutions. Journal of BusinessResearch, 107, 104–17. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
jbusres.2018.09.005

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report91

% TEA graduates% TEA non-graduates

45
40
35
30

%

25
20
15
10

0

MoroccoChina
Egypt
Indonesia
South Africa
India
Tunisia
BrazilIranVenezuela
Togo
Colombia
Guatemala
PolandGreeceTaiwanRomania
Hungary
Slovak Republic
Oman
SerbiaMexicoCroatia
LatviaPuerto Rico
Chile
Uruguay
PanamaJapan
NorwaySwitzerland
Spain
IsraelAustria
SwedenSlovenia
Luxembourg
Cyprus
Qatar
FranceGermany
Republic of Korea
Lithuania
Netherlands
United Kingdom
CanadaSaudi Arabia
United States
United Arab Emirates

5

Level CFIGURE 6.6 ​The level of
Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA) for
graduates and fornon-graduates(% of adults ineach age group)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Level B

Figure 6.6 shows TEA rates for graduatesand non-graduates in the 49 GEM economies
participating in the APS in 2022. The evidence
is unequivocal. In 45 of the 49 economies in
2022, the graduate TEA rate exceeded that of
non-graduates, the exceptions being Tunisia,
Brazil, Qatar and Saudi Arabia. In another four
economies, the graduate new entrepreneurshiprate was at least double that of non-graduates:
Israel, Romania, Cyprus and Luxembourg. Survey
results for Israel showed no non-graduate startingor running a new business in 2022.

Level AThe message from Figure 6.6 is crystal
clear.45 Higher education can be a fast track into
new entrepreneurship, so that increasing the
proportion of graduates holds substantial promisein the search for ways to grow the number of
new businesses. A more detailed analysis could
compare the likely impacts of graduate-driven andnon-graduate-driven new businesses, in termsof the potential high-impact variables identified
in Chapter 5, including job growth expectations,product and process innovation, and exportorientation.

6.5 CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONSThis chapter has demonstrated that thepropensity for new entrepreneurship can varyconsiderably between groups, providing scopefor policy measures to support and encourage
under-represented groups in starting and runningtheir businesses. If effective, such measures could
help both the individual, in terms of realizing
their own potential, and society, in terms ofoverall jobs, incomes and value-added. There is,of course, an alternative narrative — that, to be92

cost-effective, new-business-seeking resources
should be targeted at those most likely to start
their own business, such as younger people or
graduates.

45 Once more, keep in mind that between-economy
differences may be more important than betweengroup differences in the same economy. The
correlation coefficient between graduate andnon-graduate TEA is 0.914.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportThis all suggests a very important role forgovernments, both in creating an entrepreneurial
environment that is enabling and supportive,
and, if inclusion is an objective, in targeting
encouragement and resources at underrepresented groups to start their own businesses.
The specific under-represented groups consideredin this chapter were women, older people andnon-graduates, but there is scope within the GEM
dataset to identify others, such as those living inlarge multi-person households, or those with low
per capita household income. In economies with

sufficiently sized APS sample sizes, analysis could
extend to subgroups, such as older women.
At the same time, and as emphasized
throughout this chapter, it is important to keep
in mind that, while these within-economy groupdifferences may be significant, between-economy
differences can be rather more substantial. Putanother way, an older woman non-graduate in ahigh-TEA economy (such as Guatemala) may bemuch more likely to start a new business than ayounger, male graduate in a low-TEA economy(such as Poland).

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report93

7

Exiting a Business

Stephen Hill and Thomas Schøtt

7.1 INTRODUCTION
This report emphasizes the role of the individual
decision to start a business, crucial to both theprospects of that individual and to the wider
economy and society. Deciding to exit a businessis also an important part of the entrepreneurial
pipeline, and an essential ingredient in a
dynamic economy. Just as starting a businessengages resources to provide new goods andservices, exiting a business allows resources tobe redeployed elsewhere. Both the new start andthe business exit are shifting productive capacity
away from the goods and services people nolonger want or wish to pay for and towards thosethat they do. Hence it is important that businesses
be allowed to fail, and that the costs of doing
so be manageable. Productive resources freed
up by exit can include the time and effort of theentrepreneur, who may exit the business a little
older and wiser, and hence better placed to buildon that experience in a new endeavour.
Just as new starts can be encouraged by
reducing the costs of entry, so can exits bedeterred by excessive costs. There is a relationshipbetween the two: individuals will be lesslikely to start a business if exiting a businessis financially expensive, or seen as socially or
culturally undesirable. Recall from Chapter 2
that, in many economies, around half of those
who saw good opportunities to start a businesswould be deterred by the fear of failure. Reducing
the perceived risks and costs of failure can beimportant in helping to translate new businessintentions into new businesses.
Besides, there are many reasons for exiting abusiness, and it is unwise to presume that all thesereasons are negative. Positive reasons can include
selling a profitable business, receiving a good job
offer, a new and better business proposition, ora planned and well-earned retirement. Nor is it
appropriate to assume that the business closes
just because the individual exits. The businessmay transfer to new owners, which could include
previous employees, and then continue into
the future. This chapter will show that, in many
economies, especially higher-income ones, a thirdor more of those individuals exiting a business
report that the business then continues.
The most obvious reason to exit a business isbecause that business has proved unprofitable.
In these circumstances it may be better to close
the business quickly than to continue to add toaccumulated losses. Other closure reasons include
the burden of taxes or bureaucracy, difficultyin accessing resources including finance, orsome personal reason. Recent years have seen
the COVID-19 pandemic added to the list of exit
reasons, either because of illness, or supply
difficulties, or because of shifting markets as
people and businesses adjust to living and working
differently. This chapter will include a brief
assessment of the prevalence of pandemic-related
reasons for business exits over the past few years.

7.2 EXIT RATES AND TOTAL EARLY-STAGE ENTREPRENEURIAL
ACTIVITY (TEA)The GEM Adult Population Survey (APS) asks
respondents if, in the past 12 months they
had “sold, shut down, discontinued or quit abusiness they owned and managed, any form of
self-employment or selling goods and services toanyone”.46 The proportion of adults answering
yes, for each GEM participating economy in 2022,

94

is illustrated in Figure 7.1. The exit rate ranged
from less than one in 50 adults in four economies(Norway, Romania, Hungary and Taiwan), to

46 Anyone answering yes is regarded as exiting abusiness. The business exited may be nascent, new,recent or well established.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report16
14% adults 18–64

12
10
8
6
4

0

China
MoroccoSouth Africa
Venezuela
India
Colombia
GuatemalaIran
TunisiaTogo
Egypt
Indonesia
BrazilRomania
Hungary
TaiwanGreeceCroatia
Puerto Rico
SerbiaPolandLatviaSlovak Republic
Chile
MexicoUruguay
PanamaOman
NorwayJapan
Switzerland
Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
Republic of Korea
FranceAustria
IsraelSwedenCyprusLithuania
Luxembourg
Germany
Netherlands
Canada
Qatar
United States
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates

2

Level C

more than one in 10 adults in six economies, twoeach from Level C (Indonesia and Brazil), Level B(Panama and Oman) and Level A (Saudi Arabia
and the United Arab Emirates). On the whole,while exit rates decline with income level, they
were relatively modest, being less than one in 20
adults in 26 of the 49 economies.
There are many reasons why exit rates vary
within and across income groups. One importantfactor may be the rate of new businesses.
Figure 7.2 plots exit rates against the level of
Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA)
across the 49 economies in the APS in 2022. This
scatterplot is of considerable interest, not least
because of the positive association between exit
rates and TEA.47
Consider the shaded area contained within a
TEA rate of 15% and an exit rate of 6%. There are
28 economies represented within that area. Every
European economy is in that area, plus sevenothers (China, Taiwan, Japan, Morocco, South
Africa, Republic of Korea plus Israel). Conversely,
every Latin America & Caribbean, every North
American and every Gulf economy is outside ofthat area, plus Egypt, Iran, Tunisia and Indonesia.
47 The correlation coefficient between exit rates and TEA
is 0.621.

Level B

Level ASo, the lowest levels of both exit rates and TEA
are within Europe, while the highest rates of exit
and TEA are in Latin and North America, and in
the Gulf. This may point to significant culturaldifferences, with adults in Europe more reluctant
to either start or exit a business than their
American or Gulf counterparts.
The final figure in this section shows the ratioof TEA48 to business exits (Figure 7.3). There arejust four economies in which the proportion of
adults starting or running a new business was lessthan the proportion of adults exiting a business:
Egypt, Morocco, Indonesia and Poland. Given thatmany new businesses fail, these economies may
struggle to maintain their stock of businesses.
On the other hand, there were seven economies,
representing all income groups, with more thanfour people trying to start, starting or running a
new business for every one exiting a business:
Puerto Rico, Hungary, Romania, United Kingdom,
Colombia, Guatemala and Norway. Given the
difficult economic circumstances of 2022, asignificant proportion of these starts may impact
on these economies’ exit rates in the near future.

FIGURE 7.1 ​The level of businessexits in the previous
12 months (% adults)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

48 Recall that TEA includes nascent entrepreneurs: thatis, those trying to start, as well as those starting or
running, a new business.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

95

35

30

GuatemalaColombia

PanamaChile

Uruguay% TEA rate

25

United Arab Emirates

Togo

20

Puerto Rico

United States

Venezuela

15

Croatia

Tunisia

Iran

CanadaLatviaUnited Kingdom
Republic of Korea

Lithuania

MexicoNetherlands
India
Slovak Republic

SwedenSerbiaCyprusFranceGermany
IsraelRomaniaSouth Africa
Slovenia
Switzerland
Luxembourg
Spain
NorwayAustria
TaiwanJapan China
MoroccoGreeceHungary

10

5BrazilSaudi Arabia

Oman

Qatar

Indonesia
Egypt

Poland

0
0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

% exiting rate

FIGURE 7.2 ​Scatterplot of exit rates and Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) rates (both % adults)
Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0

Ratio

3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
Egypt
Indonesia
MoroccoBrazilSouth Africa
China
India
Tunisia
Iran
Togo
Venezuela
GuatemalaColombia
PolandOman
MexicoSlovak Republic
GreecePanamaUruguay
SerbiaTaiwanChile
LatviaCroatia
Romania
Hungary
Puerto Rico
Qatar
Luxembourg
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates
Germany
Austria
CanadaCyprusUnited States
Netherlands
SwedenIsraelSpain
FranceLithuania
Slovenia
Japan
Switzerland
Republic of Korea
NorwayUnited Kingdom

0.0

Level C

Level B

Level AFIGURE 7.3 ​The ratio of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) to business exits (both % adults)
Source: GEM Adult Population Survey 2022

96

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report7.3 THE PANDEMIC AND EXIT RATES
Within the 32 economies, there are somegroupings with similar experiences. Seven
economies had exit rates that rose in the firstyear of the pandemic (2019–2020) but havebeen falling since: Morocco, Colombia, Egypt,
Greece, Croatia, Panama and the Republic ofKorea. Another six saw exit rates rise in thefirst two years of the pandemic (2019–2021) but
fell in 2022: Guatemala, Chile, Canada, Cyprus,
Poland and the Netherlands. Both groups point
to a detrimental pandemic effect on exit rates,
but with some recovery since. But there isanother group of seven economies in which exit
rates actually decreased in the first year of thepandemic but have been rising since: Iran, Latvia,
Spain, the United Kingdom, Luxembourg, Sweden
and the United Arab Emirates. Each group offers
little commonality in terms of income levelor geographic region. A more refined analysis
might look at levels of government support forbusinesses, or the lack of it, or an economy’s
dependence on consumer services, or its exportorientation. There was just one economy in which
exit rates increased year by year: the UnitedStates.

Among the 32 economies in the GEM APS in all
four years from 2019 to 2022, the rate of TEA
declined in 21, and rose in 11 economies, implying
a negative pandemic impact overall on new starts(see Chapter 3). A related question is whether
the pandemic has led to an increase in exit rates.
The expectation is yes, with the pandemic bothmaking trading more difficult and impacting
on the nature of that trade. However, this isessentially, and once more, an empirical question.
Figure 7.4 shows exit rates for the 32 economies
participating in GEM over the period 2019–2022.
These include seven Level C economies, eight
Level B and 17 Level A. While each economy
has its own story to tell, there are some
generalizations that can be made. In the period
2019–2020, 17 economies had an increase inexit rates, while 15 had falls. Between 2020 and
2021, 21 exit rates increased and 10 fell, so moreclearly an increase. But between 2021 and 2022, 14
economies saw exit rates increase, while they fellin 18 others. Taking the entire period 2019–2022,
20 economies saw exit rates rise, while they fellin 11 others. So, again, exit rates have increased,
although that increase was not universal.

2019

2020

2021

FIGURE 7.4 ​The percentageof adults exiting abusiness, 2019–2022
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey
2019–2022

2022

16
14

% of adults 18–64

12
10
8
6
4

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

United Arab Emirates

Qatar

CanadaSaudi Arabia

IsraelSwedenUnited States

Luxembourg

Germany

United Kingdom

Republic of Korea

Switzerland

CyprusNorwayNetherlands

Slovenia

Spain

Oman

Chile

PanamaCroatia

Slovak Republic

LatviaPolandEgypt

GreeceIranBrazilGuatemalaColombia

India

0

Morocco2

Level A97

7.4 EXIT AND CONTINUATIONFIGURE 7.5 ​The percentageof adults exiting
a business andreporting that thebusiness did, or
did not, continue

As noted earlier, exiting a business need notmean that the business closes. The businessmay be sold or otherwise passed to someone
else, could be taken over or merged with anotherbusiness, or could continue in some otherform. Those individuals identified in the APS as
exiting a business were asked if that business
continued after they left. Results are shown in
Figure 7.5, where the lower part of the column
is the percentage of adults exiting a businessand that business continued, ranging from lessthan 1% of adults in eight economies: six from
Europe plus Morocco and Japan, all the way
up to 4% in Indonesia and the United States,
6% in Saudi Arabia and 8% of adults in the

United Arab Emirates. The upper section of eachcolumn shows exits where the business did notcontinue, while the total height of the column isthe level of business exits for that economy, as in
Figure 7.1.
Continuation of the business as a share of exits
was less than one in five in seven economies, fivefrom Level C and two from Level B, and more than
one in three in 19 economies, three from Level C,
five Level B, plus 11 Level A. The likelihood thatthe business continues after exit increases withincome level. Finally, there were four economies
where over half of businesses continued after theindividual exited: India, Taiwan, Serbia and theUnited Arab Emirates.

Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Exit, business continued

Exit, business did not continue

16
14% of adults 18–64

12
10
8
6
4

0

China
MoroccoSouth Africa
Venezuela
India
Colombia
GuatemalaIran
TunisiaTogo
Egypt
Indonesia
BrazilRomania
Hungary
TaiwanGreeceCroatia
Puerto Rico
SerbiaPolandLatviaSlovak Republic
Chile
MexicoUruguay
PanamaOman
NorwayJapan
Switzerland
Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
Republic of Korea
FranceAustria
IsraelSwedenCyprusLithuania
Luxembourg
Germany
Netherlands
Canada
Qatar
United States
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates

2

Level C98

Level B

Level A

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report7.5 REASONS FOR EXIT
The introduction to this chapter outlined manyof the reasons for exiting a business. Someof those reasons may reflect broad economic
conditions across a region, while others may
be particular to a given economy. The APS asks
those exiting a business the main reason for
doing so, and then categorizes those reasons into
positive, such as selling the business or someother business opportunity, or negative, such as
losing money or excessive taxation. Since 2020
a third, also negative, reason has been added:
the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Resultsfor 2022 are set out in Figure 7.6, where the lower
part of the column shows the level of (previously
identified) negative reasons, the middle partare COVID-related reasons and the upper partare positive reasons. Positive reasons for exit
as a share of adults are highest in four Level A
economies: Saudi Arabia (5%), the United ArabEmirates, Canada and the United States (all 3%).
At the other end of the scale are 11 economies,
representing all income groups, where less than
0.5% of adults exited a business for positive
reasons.

Exiting a business for COVID-related reasons
was very much a minority activity in 2022,
accounting for less than 1% of adults in 31 of the
49 economies. The highest rates of COVID-related
exits were all outside Europe: 4% of adults inPanama and 3% in Oman, Brazil and Mexico.
In most economies, other negative reasons far
outweighed COVID-related reasons.
The final issue to be addressed is the changes,
over the pandemic cycle, in the share of thoseexiting a business who attributed that exit to
COVID-related reasons. Figure 7.7 shows the
proportion of business exits attributed to COVID
between 2020 and 2022, for the 32 economies
that participated in GEM in all three years. Acrossthose three years the highest shares attributed to
COVID, at more than three in five, were all in 2020
(Panama, India, Saudi Arabia and Chile), while
the lowest shares were all in 2022 (Saudi Arabia,
Sweden and Luxembourg) and in 2021 (Sweden
and Republic of Korea).
More generally, in 2020 the share of exits
attributed to COVID-related reasons exceeded
two in five in 11 of the 32 economies. By 2021

FIGURE 7.6 ​Reasons for exiting
a business: negative,
COVID-related andpositive (all % adults)
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey 2022

Negative, not including COVID-19 pandemic

COVID-19 pandemic

Positive14

12% of adults 18–64

10

8

6

4

0

China
MoroccoVenezuela
South Africa
India
Colombia
GuatemalaIran
Tunisia
Togo
Indonesia
Egypt
BrazilRomania
Hungary
TaiwanGreecePuerto Rico
Croatia
LatviaSerbiaPolandSlovak Republic
Chile
Uruguay
MexicoOman
PanamaNorwayJapan
Switzerland
Slovenia
Spain
United Kingdom
IsraelSwedenFranceAustria
Republic of Korea
Lithuania
CyprusLuxembourg
Germany
Netherlands
CanadaUnited States
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
United Arab Emirates

2

Level C

Level B

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Level A

99

2020

2021

2022

70

60

% TEA

50

40

30

20

10

FIGURE 7.7 ​The percentage
of business exits
attributed to thepandemic (% exits),
2020–2022
Source: GEM Adult
Population Survey
2020, 2021, 2022

Level A

this was the case in seven economies, but
by 2022 this had fallen to just one economy(Poland). Conversely, in 2020, COVID-related
reasons were cited as reasons in less than one infive exits in just 10 economies, 10 again in 2021,

Saudi Arabia

CyprusUnited States

Qatar

United Kingdom

CanadaSwitzerland

Spain

Netherlands

Slovenia

Luxembourg

SwedenNorwayGermany

Republic of Korea

IsraelPanamaChile

PolandUruguay

GreeceOman

Croatia

LatviaSlovak Republic

Level B

United Arab Emirates

Level C

India

Egypt

Colombia

GuatemalaBrazilMorocco0

but by 2022 was 22 out of 32. By 2021 this had
grown to 10 economies, and by 2022 was 22 outof 32. Hence, there is clear evidence that COVID
as a reason for exit has declined substantiallysince 2020.

7.6 CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONSBeing able to exit a business is an important partof the entrepreneurial pipeline, and may play asignificant role in the decision to start a business.
Chapter 2 showed that, even in economies where
many people see good opportunities to start abusiness, where they think starting a businessis easy, and where they have confidence in theirown skills and knowledge, up to half of thesewould be deterred from starting by the fear of
failure. Where exiting a business is costly, or
socially or culturally discouraged, the fear of
failure is likely to be high enough to deter many
starts.
Exiting a business plays a role in the allocationof resources and in facilitating structural change.
Those starting a business direct resources
to the production of some good or service. If

100

consumers or other businesses fail to buy these,then ultimately the business will fail and theindividual will exit. This frees up those resources
to be relocated in the production of goods andservices that consumers or businesses will buy.
This is the market system in action, and, while thebusiness failing may prove difficult for the owner,that exit is a key feature in the process of resource
allocation.
Not all business exits are for negative reasons:in many economies, especially in high-income
ones, a quarter or more of exits can be forpositive reasons, such as selling the business orplanned retirement. Nor does exiting a businessnecessarily mean that the business closes. In 17of the 49 economies, more than a third of thoseexiting a business reported that the business

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Reportcontinued (and 11 of these were income Level A
economies).
So there can be many reasons to celebrate theindividual exiting a business: the reallocation of
resources to more productive uses, the motive forthe exit may be positive, and the business may
well continue anyway. In addition, the exit means
one more person with experience and lessons
learned, who may then be in a better position tostart a new endeavour, or to mentor others who
are doing so.
The relationship between the percentage ofadults starting or running a new business andthe percentage exiting a business in 2022 proved
to be very interesting. Not only do exits tend tobe highest where starts are highest, and lowest
where starts are lowest, the latter tend to be in
Europe and the former anywhere but Europe. The
brief analysis presented in this chapter is merely
scratching the surface of what may well turn out
to be a rich vein of entrepreneurial research into
the future.
Finally, this chapter has looked at the levelof business exits over the pandemic period, andat the changing reasons given for those exits.
Overall, there are indications that business exits
increased in the early days of the pandemic,
but there is also clear evidence that the shareof exits attributed to COVID has started to fall
sharply.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report101PART 2

National
Contexts andEconomyProfilesThis part of the Global Report concerns the significance of place, firstby setting out the GEM approach to analysing the characteristics ofplace that matter most to entrepreneurial activity, and then by assessing
each economy against those characteristics. This is followed by a set of
Economy Profiles, one for each of the GEM 2022 participating economies,
including a “bird’s-eye view” of key country-specific GEM research results
alongside basic socio-economic data for that economy, plus a policy
roadmap.

The Context for
Entrepreneurship

8

Stephen Hill and Alicia Coduras“Places carry meanings, memories, culture and people.”

8.1 INTRODUCTION
The focus of Part 1 has been on the individual
decision to start (or sometimes to stop) a business,and its relationship to perceptions and attitudes,
as well as how the impacts of that decision arelikely to vary with expectations. In this section,
the focus shifts to the context of that decision, orthe entrepreneurial environment in which thatdecision is made. The importance of that context,
and its role in enabling or constraining thedevelopment of the business, will partly dependon the nature of the business. If selling solely
online, an entrepreneur can operate anywhere witha decent enough Internet connection, althougheven here there will be some interaction withthe locality in terms of premises, relationship toInternet provider, receiving and dispatching goods,
etc. At the other end of the scale, the fortunes ofthe street-corner coffee shop, or petrol station,
may be proportional to the density of pedestrian orvehicular traffic passing by.

The new business is located in a specific place
in a particular economy. While every economy has
multiple localities with different characteristics,49
each economy has its own particular environment
for entrepreneurship, which may facilitate or
enable the new business starter, or which mayhinder and constrain the development of thatbusiness. Some businesses start, and succeed,in the most hostile environments, while even themost welcoming and supportive environment will
not turn a bad idea into a successful business.
Chapter 6 showed that while between-groupdifferences in Total early-stage Entrepreneurial
Activity (TEA) can be important, these differences
are likely to be dwarfed by those between
economies. So there is an imperative to identify
and assess those characteristics of a specificeconomy that can influence the prevalence of new
business starts, and the development of those
new starts into established businesses.

8.2 DEFINING AND ASSESSING CONTEXTGEM defines the entrepreneurial context of aparticular economy in terms of a number ofcharacteristics, labelled the Entrepreneurship
Framework Conditions (EFCs), as summarizedin Table 8.1. These key influences are derived
from more than two decades of GEM research,experience and knowledge. The state of the EFCs
can encourage and enable, or discourage andconstrain, both the new start and any subsequent
growth and development. Many of these EFCs are

subject to the direct influence of government, sothat the state of these EFCs can reflect government
priorities and spending.

49 Much recent GEM work has highlighted the regional
entrepreneurial ecosystem. See, for example,
Sternberg R., Von Bloh J., & Conduras A. (2018) A new
framework to measure entrepreneurial ecosystems at
the regional level. Zeitschift für Wirtschsfftsgeographie,63, 2–4. doi: https://doi.org/10.1515/zfw-2018-0014

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report105TABLE 8.1
National
Entrepreneurial
Framework
Conditions:
Summary

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance: there are sufficient funds for new startups
A2. Ease of Access to Entrepreneurial Finance: and those funds are easy to access
B1. Government Policy — Support and Relevance: policies promote and support startups
B2. Government Policy — Taxes and Bureaucracy: new businesses are not over-burdenedC.

Government Entrepreneurial Programs: quality support programs are widely available

D1. Entrepreneurial Education at School: schools introduce entrepreneurial ideas
D2. Entrepreneurial Education Post-School: colleges offer courses in how to start a businessE.

Research and Development Transfers: research is easily transferred into new businesses

F.

Commercial and Professional infrastructure: quality services are available and affordable

G1. Ease of Entry — Market Dynamics: markets are free, open and growing
G2. Ease of Entry — Burdens and Regulations: regulations encourage not restrict entry
H.

Physical Infrastructure: good-quality, available and affordable

I.

Social and Cultural Norms: encourage and celebrate entrepreneurship

There is no objective measure of the quality
or level of these EFCs, given that each has
multiple dimensions. The GEM approach to theirassessment is to pool the subjective judgementof a number of identified national experts,
each of whom completes an online National
Expert Survey (NES). This survey is undertaken
by at least 36 experts in each economy, often
more, each of whom has been selected for theirexpertise by the corresponding National Team andapproved by GEM. Each expert assesses a numberof statements that comprise the Framework
Conditions50 on an 11-point Likert scale from 0
to 10, according to their view of whether each of
those statements is completely untrue (assessedas 0), neither true nor false (five), completely true(10) or any point in between.51 Because the samequestions are asked in all economies, results canbe compared across those economies. In making
international comparisons, one note of caution isthat those assessments can themselves be contextdependent, so that, for example, national expert
views on the ease of accessing of entrepreneurial
finance may vary with that economy’s level ofdevelopment.
The 2022 NES included questions on two new
topics: recovery from the pandemic, and actions
50 So, for example, for Framework Condition A2 (Easeof Access to Entrepreneurial Finance), experts are
asked to assess four statements relating to accessto debt funding, hiring financial support services atreasonable cost, access to seed capital, and access togrowth capital after initial startup.
51 A principal components analysis converts thesecollective expert views into a score for each EFC.

106

in support of the United Nations Sustainable
Development Goals (SDGs).
The summary expert-derived assessments
for each Framework Condition are set out in theindividual Economy Profiles of this Global Reportin the pages subsequent to this chapter. In themeantime, Table 8.2 shows, for each income level,
the highest and lowest scores for each Framework
Condition, plus for the two new topics.
There is considerable positive association
between income level and Framework Condition
scores. For 10 of 13 Framework Conditions,the highest results for Level A exceed thehighest for Level B, and also do so for 11 of 13
lowest. All 13 Level A highest scores exceed thecorresponding Level C scores, as they do for 11 of
the lowest scores. The exceptions are for PhysicalInfrastructure and Social and Cultural Norms,
where very low scores for Israel saw it ranked lastof all the economies for these two conditions.
The highest scores for COVID recovery inincome groups A, B and C were for Lithuania,
Uruguay and India respectively, suggestingthat recovery from the economic impacts ofthe pandemic was well under way in each ofthese, while Israel, Oman and Togo scored least,
implying these still have a long way to go. Not
surprisingly, actions in support of the UN SDGs
typically scored higher in high-income economies.
Overall, three Level A economies (Norway, France
and Israel), one Level B (Taiwan) and one Level C(India) scored highest, while three Level C (Iran,
Togo and Tunisia), plus two Level B economies(Oman and Romania), scored lowest.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportFramework Condition

A1. Finance
A2. Access
B1. Policy
B2. Burdens
C. Programs
D1. Schools
D2. Colleges
E. R&D Transfer
F.

Commercial

G1. Entry Dynamics
G2. Entry Burden
H. Infrastructure
I.

CultureCOVID recovery
SDG actions

Level A

Level B

Level Chigh

United Arab Emirates

7.2 Taiwan5.9 Indonesia6.0

low

Cyprus3.4 Panama3.1 Venezuela1.9

high

United Arab Emirateslow

Italy3.9 Argentina2.5 Venezuela1.8

high

United Arab Emirates

low

Spain2.9 Argentina1.8 Venezuela2.1

high

United Arab Emirates

low

Spain3.3 Argentina1.8 Venezuela1.7

highAustria7.1 Taiwan6.6 India6.3

low

Cyprus3.6 Argentina3.2 Venezuela2.1

highIsrael7.6 Latvia5.6 India5.7

low

Cyprus2.5 Mexico1.7 Togo1.5high

United Arab Emirates

lowAustria3.8 Romania3.1 Iran3.0

high

United Arab Emirates

low

Spain3.4 Poland2.8 Venezuela2.1

high

United Arab Emirates

lowIsrael4.8 Oman4.1 Venezuela3.8

high

Korean R

lowFrance3.7 Uruguay2.0 Guatemala3.4

highIsrael6.9 Latvia5.5 India6.0

low

Spain4.1 Mexico3.3 Iran3.1

high

Switzerland7.8 Taiwan8.4 China7.3

lowIsrael3.6 Oman4.6 Venezuela4.0

high

United Arab Emirates

lowIsrael2.5 Panama3.2 Tunisia3.7

high

Lithuania7.3 Uruguay6.7 India6.7

low

Israel4.0 Oman3.9 Togo3.8

highNorway6.7 Taiwan6.6 Indonesia6.0

low

Cyprus4.5 Oman3.6 Iran3.1

7.2 Taiwan5.4 India5.7

6.9 Taiwan7.1 India6.6

6.9 Taiwan7.1 China6.5

7.4 Taiwan5.9 Indonesia6.2

6.8 Taiwan5.8 India5.7

6.8 Taiwan6.9 India5.9

7.8 Latvia7.1 Venezuela7.1

7.9 Taiwan6.7 Indonesia6.4

8.3 CONTEMPORARY ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORKCONDITIONS (EFCs)
The scores representing each framework condition
vary on a scale of 0–10. As such, a midpoint scoreof 5.0 can be regarded as adequate or sufficient forthat condition. It may be presumed that higherincome economies would be assessed as adequate
or better across most conditions, and that
low-income economies may struggle to meet thosestandards. The reality, as usual, is rather more
complex. Figure 8.1 shows, for each participating
economy, the number of framework conditions(out of 13), scored at 5.0 (sufficient) or more.
Only three economies were scored as adequate
or better in all 13 EFCs: the United Arab Emirates,
India and the Netherlands. Of the 11 economies

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

TABLE 8.2 ​Entrepreneurial
Framework
Conditions: highest
and lowest scoresby income level
Source: GEM National
Expert Survey, 2022

107

13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
South Africa
Togo
Tunisia
Iran
BrazilMoroccoVenezuela
Egypt
GuatemalaColombia
China
Indonesia
India
Oman
Puerto Rico
PolandArgentina
Croatia
GreeceMexicoPanamaRomania
Slovak RepublicHungary
SerbiaUruguay
Chile
LatviaTaiwanItaly
Spain
CyprusSlovenia
AustriaJapan
United Kingdom
Germany
SwedenUnited States
CanadaLuxembourg
NorwayFranceIsraelRepublic of Korea
Qatar
Saudi Arabia
Switzerland
Lithuania
Netherlands
United Arab Emirates

0

Level CFIGURE 8.1 ​Number of
Entrepreneurial
Framework
Conditions (from 13)scored as sufficientor better (score ≥5.0)(51 economies, 2022)
Note: The 49 economies
participating in the 2022
GEM Adult Population
Survey all took part in
the 2022 GEM National
Expert Survey, where
they were joined by
Argentina and Italy,
who participatedonly in the NES.
Source: GEM National
Expert Survey 2022

Level Bscored as sufficient in 10 or more EFCs, seven
were income Level A, two were Level B (Latvia
and Taiwan) and two were Level C (India
and Indonesia). One other Level C economy
performed well: China, with nine EFCs scored as
sufficient.
At the other end of the scale, three economies
had no EFCs scored as sufficient: Togo, Tunisia
and South Africa. All are from Level C. However,of the 11 economies with just two or fewer EFCsscored as sufficient, three were from Level B(Oman, Puerto Rico and Poland) and one wasLevel A (Italy). Another high-income economy,

Level A

Spain, fared little better, with just three EFCsscored as sufficient.
So while there is, not surprisingly, a positive
association between income level and EFC
scores, that association is far from linear. There
are several low-income economies consistently
scoring high in terms of EFCs, with very positiveenvironments for starting and growing a new
business, as well as a number of high-income
economies whose entrepreneurial environments
could and should be a lot better. This may havelong-term implications for the growth prospects ofeach economy.

8.4 THE NATIONAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP CONTEXT INDEX(NECI)
It is clear that most economies are good in termsof some EFCs but not so good in others. So it is noteasy to assess where are the best places to startand grow a business, or to compare the relative
merits of different economies. In 2018, GEM
tackled this issue head-on by developing a single
number to represent the quality of an individual
economy’s entrepreneurial environment; this is108

known as the National Entrepreneurship Context
Index or NECI.
The analysis so far has considered 13 EFCs
across 51 different economies. That represents
663 individual EFC scores, all of which areenumerated in the individual Economy Profiles
that follow this chapter. The NECI simplifies thispicture by taking each economy’s EFC scores

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Reportthis table, with seven of the top 12 economies
ranked by NECI coming from Level A, with twofrom level B and three from Level C. Certainly, ahigh average income level does not guarantee ahigh-quality environment for entrepreneurship,
any more than a low-income level prevents it.
Five of these top-12-ranked economies are from
East Asia, with four from the Middle East andand averaging them to get an NECI score for that
economy. Results for 2022 are set out in Figure 8.2.
Not surprisingly, economies with lots of EFCsscored as sufficient or better also scored wellin the NECI. For the second successive year theUnited Arab Emirates tops this league table,
and has increased both its score and its lead.
There is clear association with income level in

FIGURE 8.2
National
Entrepreneurial
Context Index(NECI) 2022
Source: GEM National
Expert Survey 2022

United Arab Emirates
Saudi Arabia
TaiwanIndia
Netherlands
Lithuania
Indonesia
Switzerland
Republic of Korea
Qatar
China
IsraelLatviaNorwayUnited States
CanadaGermany
FranceSwedenLuxembourg
Japan
Austria
Slovenia
Hungary
United Kingdom
GreeceSerbiaColombia
Chile
Uruguay
Slovak Republic
Egypt
CyprusPanamaMoroccoRomania
Italy
Oman
CroatiaSouth Africa
Spain
Puerto Rico
GuatemalaMexicoPolandArgentina
Tunisia
BrazilTogo
IranVenezuela

7.2
6.3
6.2
6.1
5.9
5.8
5.8
5.8
5.7
5.7
5.6
5.5
5.5
5.2
5.2
5.1
5.1
5.1
5.0
5.0
5.0
4.8
4.8
4.7
4.7
4.6
4.6
4.5
4.5
4.5
4.4
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.3
4.2
4.2
4.2
4.1
4.1
4.0
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.8
3.7
3.7
3.6
3.6
3.6
3.2

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

NECI score

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report109three from Europe. None are from Latin or North
America.
At the other end of the scale, economies withfew EFCs scored as sufficient featured heavily
in the bottom 12 of the NECI ranking. Venezuela
scored least by some margin. Seven of the bottom
12 were Level C economies, with four Level B andjust one Level A economy (Spain). Six of thosebottom 12 are from Latin America & Caribbean,
with another three from Africa, two from Europe(Poland and Spain) and one from Asia (Iran).
There is a complex relationship between theentrepreneurial context and the proportion of
adults starting or running new business. Of the 12
economies scoring highest in the NECI, five had
levels of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA) below 10%, and just one reached 20% ormore (United Arab Emirates). Of the 12 economies
scoring lowest in the NECI, only three had TEA

below 10%, while four had TEA of 20% or more.
It would be interesting, but beyond the scope of
this chapter, to relate NECI scores to some qualityadjusted measure of those starting or running a
new business — for example, the share of adults
starting a business and expecting to employ
another six or more people in five years’ time.
A quality entrepreneurial context is not justgood place to start a business. High scores for
Framework Conditions should also encourageand facilitate business growth and development,
thereby easing the transition from new toestablished businesses. As noted in Chapter 3,
the relationship between TEA and Established
Business Ownership (EBO) is also complex. Of the
12 economies scoring highest in the NECI, only
one (Republic of Korea) had a level of EBO thatwas greater than 10%, compared to five of the 12
economies scoring lowest.

8.5 THE EVOLUTION OF NECI
Earlier chapters have sought to assess the impactof the pandemic by looking at patterns of change
in some key variable (for example, the proportionof adults seeing business opportunities, or
those investing in someone else’s startup),from 2019–2022. Most of these comparisons
have pointed to a mild deterioration, althoughwith exceptions. Data are available to make thesame comparisons in terms of the evolution of
the NECI: can the pandemic be associated withimprovements in EFC scores, and therefore in the
NECI, or has the pandemic typically weakened theenvironment for entrepreneurship?
However, a major difficulty in making thosecomparisons is that NECI scores usually changevery slowly. It is tempting, but potentiallyspurious, to try to attach significance to smallchanges in what are composite scores. Of the 51
economies represented in the NECI in 2022, four
appear just in 2022 and not in any of the previous
three years, so no comparisons can be made. A
further seven economies participated twice inthe period 2019 to 2022, but none had a change
in NECI greater than 0.3. Another 14 economies
saw their NECI scores vary by very little over theperiod (no more than 0.3 overall), making it very
difficult to draw conclusions. There are a further
16 economies whose scores did vary substantially,
but these went down and then up, or up and thendown, so no clear picture emerges. This leaves

110

just a handful of economies where conclusions
can reasonably be drawn — and most of thesepoint to improvements in their entrepreneurial
environment.
The NECI score for South Africa has beensteadily improving, from 3.6 in 2019 to 4.1 in 2022.
There is a similar story for Croatia, up from 3.6 to
4.1 over the same period, with its near-neighbour
Greece also improving, from 4.1 to 4.6. The most
rapid improvements, however, were in the Gulf,
with Saudi Arabia improving its score from 5.0 in2019 to 6.3 in 2022, while, next door, the United
Arab Emirates improved from 5.8 in 2019, when it
was ranked sixth of 54 economies, to 7.2 in 2022,
the highest of all 49 economies for the second year
running. Both countries have invested heavily in
improving their entrepreneurial environments,
and this seems to be paying rich dividends. Both
had levels of TEA in 2022 that were the highestof all the high-income economies apart from theUnited States, while the level of EBO in the United
Arab Emirates was at least twice that of any othereconomy in the top 12 of the NECI league.
Rather less positively, there are two economies
whose entrepreneurial environment has
substantially worsened over the pandemic period.
The NECI score for Mexico fell from 4.7 in 2019
to 4.1 in 2020, improved slightly to 4.2 in 2021
before falling again to 3.9 in 2022. Mexico had
ranked 23rd of 54 economies in 2019 in terms

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportMexico and Spain are heavily dependent on
tourism, badly impacted by the pandemic, butthen so too are Greece and Croatia, both of whom
have clearly coped much better in preserving theirentrepreneurial environments.

of NECI score. By 2022 it had fallen to 44th of 51
economies. Spain has fared even worse, with ascore of 5.2 in 2019 (12th of 54), reducing to 4.7 in
2020, improving to 5.4 in 2021 and then collapsing
to 4.0 in 2022, ranking it 41st of the 51 economies.

8.6 THE ENTREPRENEURIAL ENVIRONMENT AND
INNOVATIONIntellectual Property Office in 2007, and has since
been published annually, becoming established as
an innovation index. It is calculated as an averageof two sub-indices, one designed to measure
innovation inputs, such as institutions, humancapital and knowledge workers, and another tomeasure innovation outputs, such as scientificresearch and creative products and services.
Figure 8.3 presents the scatterplot of the NECI
and the GII for 48 economies in 2022.52 There is

The relationship between starting a new businessand innovation was considered in Chapter 5, which
revealed that, with some notable exceptions, very
few new entrepreneurs were either producing
goods or services that were new to the world, orusing unique processes or procedures to do so.
Technology transfer was much more common,
introducing goods or services, or using processes,that were new to the country or to the area.
This section compares the summary statistic for
the quality of the entrepreneurial environment,
the NECI, to a measure of the level of innovationin an economy: the Global Innovation Index(GII). The GII was first introduced by the World

52 GII data was not available for Venezuela, Puerto
Rico and Taiwan. All GII data for 2022 are fromhttps://www.wipo.int.

FIGURE 8.3 ​Scatterplot
of National
Entrepreneurial
Context Index andGlobal Innovation
Index scores(both for 2022)

70
Switzerland

60

United Kingdom

Japan

Global Innovation Index

50
Spain

40
PolandIranBrazil30

Italy

Hungary
Slovak Republic

Mexico Romania

Tunisia
Oman
Argentina
South Africa

20

Austria
Luxembourg
CyprusCroatia

United States

SwedenNetherlands
Republic of Korea
China

Germany
FranceCanadaIsrael
NorwayUnited Arab Emirates

Slovenia

Lithuania
LatviaChile
GreeceSerbiaUruguay
Colombia
MoroccoPanamaIndia
Saudi Arabia

Qatar
Indonesia

Egypt

Guatemala
Togo

10

0
3.0

3.5

4.0

4.5

5.0

5.5

6.0

6.5

7.0

7.5

National Entrepreneurial Context Index

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report111some positive association, but also a wide varietyof outliers. Note that the NECI scale is truncated(going from 3.0 and 7.5) to allow a focus on
differences.
GII scores ranged from less than 25 (Togo,
Guatemala and Egypt, all income Level C) toover 60 (Sweden, United States and Switzerland,
all Level A). Indeed, the GII may have a closer
association to income level than the NECI; whenranked by GII score, seven of the bottom 10 are
income Level C, while nine of the top 10 are Level
A: China being the exception. Of the 48 economies
for which there are scores for both indices, 28scored less than 40 in the GII, and just 13 scoredmore than 50.
A number of economies score relatively
highly in the NECI but modestly in the GII. These
include the United Arab Emirates (7.2 NECI,
42.1 GII), Saudi Arabia (6.3, 33.4) and India (6.1,
36.6). Conversely, a number of economies score
highly in the GII but modestly in the NECI.
These include the United States (5.2, 61.8),
Sweden (5.0, 6.6) and the United Kingdom (4.7,
59.7). Of the 21 economies scored as having asufficient entrepreneurial environment (NECI≥5.0), six scored less than 40 in the GII (Saudi
Arabia, Indonesia, India, Qatar, Lithuania andLatvia), while of the top 20 ranked by GII (score≥40.6), six scored as insufficient in the NECI: theUnited Kingdom, Austria, Cyprus, Italy, Spainand Slovenia. If there are generalizations to be
made, it appears that the GII may reflect what are
long-established high-income economies (United
Kingdom, Sweden, United States), while the NECI
may reflect economic newcomers such as theUnited Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and India.
A closer analysis reveals some positive
association between individual EFC scoresand the GII. The three Framework Conditions
with the highest degree of association were thesufficiency of entrepreneurial finance (A1 in
Table 8.1), research and development transfers(E) and ease of access to entrepreneurial finance(A2).53 Higher scores in these EFCs are associatedwith higher levels in the GII. None are surprising,
given innovation can be very expensive, and that
research and development transfers can take along time.

8.7 CONCLUSIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONSThe entrepreneurial environment is definedand assessed by GEM in terms of specific
Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions (EFCs),
the quality of each of which is drawn from theassessments of at least 36 identified national
experts in each economy. These pooled scores
are transformed into a score for each EFC, which
are then averaged to calculate the National
Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI) for eacheconomy.
While EFC scores and the NECI have a positive
association with income, a number of low-income
economies have scores that reveal a quality ofentrepreneurial environment that belies theirlack of resources: for example, India, Indonesia
and China each had nine or more EFCs (out of13), scored as sufficient or better. Only seven of 22
high-income economies could match or improveon this. These low-income economies have leapt
enthusiastically onto the entrepreneurial support
train, and are reaping rewards.
At the other end of the scale, two high-income
economies, Spain and Italy, had three or fewer
EFCs scored as sufficient. Given their low scores,
their inability or unwillingness to encourage

112

and support entrepreneurship may ultimately
challenge their high-income status.
Of the 51 economies participating in the 2022
GEM National Expert Survey, the United ArabEmirates had by far the highest NECI score, andhence may be the best place to start and growa business. A high average income does notguarantee a high NECI score, but clearly helps:
in the NECI league table, the bottom four are all
low-income economies.
The evolution of NECI scores over the
pandemic period showed no clear pattern, beyond
the unequivocal statement that South Africa,
Croatia, Greece, Saudi Arabia and the United ArabEmirates have all steadily improved their NECI
scores, while both Mexico and Spain have fallen
dramatically down the NECI league table.
Finally, this chapter sought some association
between the NECI and innovation, as measured
by the World Intellectual Property Office’s Global
Innovation Index (GII). Both the GII and NECI
have some positive association with income level,

53 With respective correlation coefficients of 0.62, 0.57
and 0.56.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Reportbut some economies fare much better in one
index than the other. The United Arab Emirates,
Saudi Arabia and India were in the top four in the
NECI league, but 19th, 31st and 24th respectively
in terms of GII.54 Meanwhile, Switzerland, theUnited States, Sweden and the United Kingdom
represented the top four in the GII, but ranked

eighth, 15th, 21st and 25th, respectively, in termsof the NECI. The difference may reflect the factthat the latter four have had much longer as
high-income economies and therefore have had
more time to develop the research institutions
and technology transfers that feature heavily in
the GII.

54 Taiwan was also in the top four in the NECI, but does
not appear in the GII league table.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report113

ECONOMY PROFILE

Argentina
Q Population (2021): 45.8 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 23.6 thousand (World Bank)

Argentina did not participate in the2022 Adult Population Survey.

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.1 (11/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.2 (15/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
2.5 (16/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.0 (9/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Argentina
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
1.8 (16/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.1 (11/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
1.8 (16/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
6.7 (2/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.2 (16/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.6 (13/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.0 (14/16)

114

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.7 (7/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.0 (6/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe Argentinian economy grew by just over 4% in
2022, but with inflation (around 100%), a deteriorating
labour market, and the historic association to thedollar, all pointing to a slowdown in 2023. High inflation
increases business uncertainty, especially in relation to
the costs of labour, logistics and other resources.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022, Argentina had a very wide range of
Entrepreneurial Framework Condition scores, from avery poor 1.8 for both government policy conditions(Support and Relevance, and Taxes and Bureaucracy)
to an almost excellent 6.7 for Ease of Entry: Market
Dynamics. However, there were more low scores thanhigh, with 10 conditions assessed as insufficient (i.e.
<5.0), including three poor (score 3.0–4.0) and four very
poor (score <3.0). In addition to Ease of Entry: Market

Dynamics, the three conditions scored as sufficientor better included Physical Infrastructure andEntrepreneurial Education: Post-School.
The product of this mixture of a few good scores andmany poor ones is that the Argentinian entrepreneurial
environment had an overall quality rating of 3.7, muchless than sufficient, and placing Argentina 46th outof the 51 GEM participating economies. A low-quality
environment such as this is one in which it is difficult
for those starting new businesses to access thefinance, markets and other resources necessary to beable to develop and grow that business.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Argentina did not participate in the 2022 GEM Adult
Population Survey.

Institution

Team

Funders

Contact

Lead institution

Team leader

IAE Business School

SCarbonell@iae.edu.ar

IAE Business School

Silvia Torres Carbonell

WebsiteTeam members

https://www.iae.edu.ar/

Araceli Calja
Victoria Galera

arcalja@iae.edu.ar

APS vendor
Estrategia&Gestión MDQ SRLFAWARIS

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report115

ECONOMY PROFILE

Austria
Q Population (2021): 9.0 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 58.4 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

50.9

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

49.5

33

It is easy to start a business

48.4

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

29

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

37.9

35

To build great wealth or very high income

37.4

46

24=

To continue a family tradition

19.1

43

53.2

33

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

46.0

42

Fear of failure (opportunity)

37.9

40

Entrepreneurial intentions*

5.4

47

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.1

43=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

22.9

6

Always consider social impact

69.3

38

Always consider environmental impact

67.4

40

Industry (% TEA in business services)

34.7

8

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

6.8

40

6.1

7.4

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

8.3

15=

6.1

10.6

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

32.0

36

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

41.3

25=

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

43.6

36

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

34.9

35

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.9 (19/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.0 (12/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.6 (15/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.5 (5/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Austria
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.2 (17/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
5.5 (7/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.7 (18/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
3.7 (19/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
7.1 (1/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.1 (9/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.4 (14/22)

116

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.2 (22/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
3.8 (22/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPGDP growth for Austria in 2022 was forecast atjust under 5%, with rising energy costs pushinginflation above 10% from September onwards.
Unemployment remained relatively low, at around
5%. High prices meant a challenging environment forentrepreneurship, with increases in energy costs andrising interest rates leading to declining margins. Highproduct and service prices pointed to a deteriorating
consumer market.
The aws (Austrian Promotional Bank) launchedseveral funding programs for startups in 2022, and in
October an update of the “Red-White-Red Card” wasintroduced, to reduce labour shortages by facilitating
access to the Austrian labour market for non-EU
citizens.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Austria last participated in GEM in 2020, so there
is some opportunity to compare the situation
immediately after the start of COVID to that of 2022.
In both years, Austrian Framework Conditions present
an enigma — with islands of excellence in a sea of
mediocrity. As a result, the overall score for Austria’s
entrepreneurial environment, as measured by the
National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI), isremarkably consistent, and distinctly average. In 2020,
Austria scored 4.8 overall, placing it 18th. By 2022,
Austria also scored 4.8 overall and was ranked 22nd.
Yet this is an economy with demonstrable
excellence in some Framework Conditions. Its scoreof 7.1 for Government Entrepreneurial Programs
was the highest of all 51 economies participatingin the National Expert Survey. Its score of 7.5 forPhysical Infrastructure placed it sixth highest. Yet,in 2022, the same economy ranked 41st out of 51
for Entrepreneurial Education at School, 44th forSocial and Cultural Norms, 45th for Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School and 46th for Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics. Most of these framework scores
could be lifted with more commitment and moreinvestment, especially by the government.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Entrepreneurial activity data for Austria suggest
a slow recovery from the economic impacts of
COVID-19. The percentage of adults starting or
running a new business has increased slightly (from6.2% to 6.8%), but is still lower than pre-COVID rates.
On the other hand, the level of EBO returned topre-COVID levels by increasing from 7.8% to 8.3%. In
2022, 5.4% of adults intended to start a business inthe next three years, compared to 7% in 2020, both
figures relatively low, even by European standards.
Finally in 2022, 7.7% of adults had invested insomeone else’s startup, up from 7.3% in 2020. So allof these entrepreneurial variables had nudged up
slightly over the two years.
While the proportion of Austrian adults who
knew someone who had started their own businessremained just above a half, one area of significant
change was in the proportion of adults seeing
local good conditions to start a business, up fromjust under a third in 2020 to a half in 2022. A half ofAustrian adults knew someone who had started a new
business recently, or considered themselves to havethe skills and experience to start their own. So Austria
had no shortage of opportunity recognition, or of
entrepreneurial role models, and no lack of confidence,
although of those who saw good conditions to start abusiness, just over a third would be deterred by fear of
failure.
“Earning a living because jobs are scarce” was themost commonly agreed motivation in 2022, followedby “making a difference in the world”, just as they werein 2020. The proportion reporting they have customers
outside of the country declined during the onset of thepandemic to 37% and increased back to 44% in 2022.
Two in five new entrepreneurs expect to use moredigital technologies to sell their products in the next
six months, while the share who expect to employ anadditional six people or more in five years has shot up
from less than 1% during the start of the pandemic to
16% in 2022.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

FH Joanneum GmbH — University ofApplied Sciences

Christian Friedl

Federal Ministry Labour and Economy(BMAW)

Market Marktforschungs-Ges.m.b.H.
& Co.KG

Federal Ministry of Climate Action,
the Environment, Energy, Mobility,
Innovation and Technology (BMK)

Contact

Austrian Federal Economic Chamber(WKO)

christian.friedl@fh-joanneum.at

Team members
Rene Wenzel
Bernadette Frech

Type of institution
University
Websitehttps://www.fh-joanneum.at/

Lisa Mahajan

Federal Economic Chamber of Vienna(WKW)
Austrian Council for Research andTechnology Development (Rat FTE)
Austrian Economic Service (AWS)
Austrian Research Promotion Agency(FFG)
Joanneum Research
FH JOANNEUM — University ofApplied Sciences
B&C Privatstiftung — eXplore!

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report117

ECONOMY PROFILE

BrazilQ Population (2021): 214.0 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 16.1 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

75.8

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

67.9

12

It is easy to start a business

46.8

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

3

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

75.2

5

To build great wealth or very high income

64.3

18

28

To continue a family tradition

44.1

8

69.2

12

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

82.0

11

Fear of failure (opportunity)

49.0

15

Entrepreneurial intentions*

53.0

1=

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

6.4

6=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

2.1

42=

Always consider social impact

90.2

4=

Always consider environmental impact

91.3

5

Industry (% TEA in business services)

19.8

25

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

20.0

8=

17.2

23.0

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

10.4

7

6.8

14.2

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

56.8

17=

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

53.7

12

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

85.4

1

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

64.8

4

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.1 (7/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.5 (10/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
2.9 (11/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
4.9 (10/13)

9
8
7
6
5

BrazilLevel C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.1 (11/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.3 (11/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
2.8 (12/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.2 (7/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.4 (10/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.1 (12/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.7 (10/13)

118

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
1.8 (12/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.0 (9/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPUp to July 2022, GDP in Brazil grew by 4%, while
consumer price inflation was around 10%. The
unemployment rate was down to 9%, having
been 13% a year earlier. Government policies havesupported rapid recovery for the economic effectsof the pandemic, although rising costs and demand
uncertainty may have deterred some potential
entrepreneurs.
The Ministry of Economy has introduced reforms
to the legal system: for example Law No. 182 hasestablished the legal framework for innovative
entrepreneurship.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022 the overall assessment of Brazil’s
entrepreneurial environment was unchanged from ayear earlier, with a National Entrepreneurial Context
Index (NECI) score of 3.6, matching that of 2021. In 2021,
Brazil’s NECI score ranked 47th out of 50 economies. In
2022 that rank changed to 48th — because there were
now 51 economies taking part.
There were some small changes in individual
Framework Condition scores between 2021 and
2022, with six declines and seven increases. The
greatest fall was in Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics,
while the largest increase was in Social and Cultural
Norms. There was also some deterioration in score
for the two entrepreneurial finance conditions,
offset by improvements in scores for government
entrepreneurial policies and programs.
All of the Brazil individual framework scores for2022 were less than the average framework scoresfor Level C, apart from that for Social and Cultural
Norms, which was the same. So Brazil presents a fairly
weak environment in which to start or develop a new
business, even among Level C economies. Under
these conditions, many of the new businesses started
are unlikely to be sustained long enough to become
established.

Institution

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The percentage of adults in Brazil investing insomeone else’s new business has increased rapidly
over the pandemic period — from just 4% in 2018 to 7%
in 2020, then to 12% in 2022. Meanwhile, the proportionof adults intending to start their own business rosefrom a third to a half at the start of the pandemic, andhas remained at this level since.
Despite more than a half of Brazilian adults
reporting that the pandemic had reduced theirhousehold income, it appears to have had little
impact on the level of new entrepreneurship, withthe percentage of adults starting or running a new
business falling slightly between 2020 and 2021, but
remaining high (at over one in five) since then. By
contrast, the level of EBO was heavily impacted at thestart of the pandemic, falling from 16% to 9% between
2019 and 2020, and recovering slightly (to 10%) sincethen. So, in 2019, Brazil had three adults starting or
running a new business for every two running anestablished business. By 2022 this ratio had changed to
two new starters for every established owner.
Under these circumstances, it is not surprising that
more than three-quarters of adults in Brazil in 2022
knew someone who has started a business, while
two out of three considered themselves to have theskill and experience to do so. A similar proportion saw
good opportunities to start a business locally, but, as
elsewhere, half of these would be deterred by fear of
failure.
“Earning a living because jobs are scarce” hasbeen the dominant agreed motivation for new
entrepreneurs since this question was introduced
by GEM four years ago, although agreement with“making a difference in the world” has been risingsteadily. More than four out of five new entrepreneurs
expected to use more digital technology to sell theirproducts in the next six months, while more than
three in 10 expected to employ another six or more
people in five years’ time. However, the share of new
entrepreneurs with customers outside of their country,
while increasing, remained very low at just 7% in 2022.

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Harvest Pesquisas

ANEGEPE

Simara Greco

Serviço Brasileiro de Apoio às Micro ePequenas Empresas (SEBRAE)
ANEGEPE

Contact

Team members
Vinicius Larangeiras
Edmundo Inácio Juniorsimaragreco@yahoo.com.br

Rose Mary Almeida Lopes
Type of institution
Non-governmental organisation
Websitehttps://anegepe.org.br/

Edmilson de Oliveira Lima
Liliane de Oliveira Guimarães
Paulo Alberto Bastos Jr
Fernando Gimenez

Other institutions involved
Serviço Brasileiro de Apoio às Micro ePequenas Empresas (SEBRAE)

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report119ECONOMY PROFILE

CanadaQ Population (2021): 38.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 52.1 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

47.3

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

58.8

22

It is easy to start a business

63.0

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

35

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

64.1

12

To build great wealth or very high income

65.8

17

17

To continue a family tradition

38.1

11

55.4

26

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

58.5

34

Fear of failure (opportunity)

51.8

8

Entrepreneurial intentions*

14.2

30

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

3.1

19=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

21.3

10=

Always consider social impact

69.9

36

Always consider environmental impact

75.8

28

Industry (% TEA in business services)

33.8

11

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

16.5

13

14.8

18.3

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

6.2

27

5.4

7.0

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

33.5

33

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

49.8

17

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

55.3

19

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

55.5

11

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.7 (8/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.2 (11/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.7 (14/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.5 (14/22)

9
8
7
6
5

CanadaLevel A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
5.2 (10/22)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.6 (18/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.8 (8/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.8 (15/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.6 (15/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.6 (13/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.7 (12/22)

120

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.4 (13/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.8 (16/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe Canadian economy grew by almost 3% in Q3, 2022,
driven by improving supply chains and commodity
demand, combined with lower unemployment (5% in
November 2022). In addition, there were reductions
in housing investment and household spending, andrising interest rates and inflation. Labour, energy andraw material cost increases were constraining businessgrowth, while inflation as measured by consumer
prices was almost 7% in October 2022.
The Canadian federal budget in 2022 raised
eligibility for the small business tax rate, andencouraged strategic investment for SMEs in healthfocused businesses and increased access to Canada’s
trade remedy system.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Canada, like its neighbour to the south, is ahigh-income economy with a strong tradition in
entrepreneurship. On the surface, there was littlechange in the overall assessment of the qualityof the Canadian entrepreneurial environment
between 2021 and 2022, with an unchanged National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score of 5.1
leading to a marginal fall in the overall ranking from15th to 16th.
Beneath the surface, however, there wasconsiderable turmoil in the Framework Conditions,with five framework scores increasing but sevenfalling. Two conditions that had been rated as
insufficient in 2021 improved to sufficiency (≥5.0) in
2022: Government Policy: Support and Relevance andGovernment Entrepreneurial Programs. One conditionpreviously rated as sufficient — Ease of Entry: Burdens
and Regulation — is now insufficient. All three arewithin the purview of the government, so some mixed
messages there.
Overall, Canada’s Entrepreneurial Framework
Conditions all scored at modest to good, withthe highest rank among the 51 economies being
Government Policy: Support and Relevance (14thout of 51), and the lowest being Ease of Entry: Market
Dynamics (34th).

Institution
Lead institution
The Centre for Innovation Studies(THECIS)Type of institution
Research InstituteWebsitehttp://www.thecis.ca
Other institutions involved
The Centre for Innovation Studies
University of Calgary
Memorial University of Newfoundland

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Around a third of Canadian adults reported that theirhousehold income had been reduced by the pandemic
in 2022, a relatively high proportion but down from two
in five in 2020. Both the percentage of adults investingin someone else’s business, and the percentage ofadults intending to start their own business in the next
three years fell in the early stages of the pandemic, butboth had recovered strongly enough by 2021 for levels
to exceed those of 2019. Unfortunately, both levels fell
again to below pre-pandemic rates in the difficult
trading conditions of 2022.
Over half of Canadian adults agreed they havethe skills and experience to start their own business,with slightly more seeing good opportunities to start
their own business locally, and slightly less knowing
someone who has started their own business recently.
However, half of those seeing good opportunities
would be deterred by the fear of failure.
As with the other entrepreneurial variables, both theproportion of adults starting or running a new businessand the proportion running an established businessfluctuated during the pandemic cycle, with both falling
initially from 2019 to 2020, then rising in 2021 to exceed
their 2019 level, then falling below this in 2022. In 2020,
TEA was 16% with EBO at 7%. By 2022 the corresponding
figures were 16% and 6%. These figures may suggest thatsome trading conditions in Canada in 2022 were actuallyworse than in the early stages of the pandemic. As
another example, more of Canada’s new entrepreneurs
have agreed with the motivation “making a differencein the world” than “building great wealth or very highincome” since these questions were introduced by GEM
in 2019. In 2022, these positions were reversed.
Finally, substantially fewer new entrepreneurs in
Canada in 2022 had customers outside the country(32%) than either before the pandemic (39% in 2019)or in its early stages (38% in 2020). More than half ofCanada’s new entrepreneurs expected to use moredigital technology in the next six months to sell theirproducts, while job growth expectations were strong,with the percentage expecting to employ another six
or more people in five years’ time increasing from 13%
in 2020 to 19% in 2022.

Cape Breton University

Team members

Geoff Gregson

University of New Brunswick

Chad Saunders

Brian Wixted

University of PEIBlair Winsor

David Clough

Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières

Kevin McKague

University of Ottawa

Yves Bourgeois

Toronto Metropolitan University

Tasha Richard

University of Manitoba

Matthew Pauley

University of Regina

Étienne St-Jean

University of Saskatchewan

Marc Duhamel

Mount Royal University

Sandra Schillo

University of Alberta

Charles Davis
Howard Lin

Team
Team leaderPeter Josty, PhD

Nathan Greidanus
Chris Street
Tyler Case
Amanda Williams

Funders
Government of Canada
Government of Alberta
Government of Quebec

APS vendor
Elemental Data Collection Inc.

Contactp.josty@thecis.ca

Karen Hughes

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report121

ECONOMY PROFILEChile
Q Population (2021): 19.2 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 29.1 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

68.6

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

50.5

32

It is easy to start a business

51.1

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

6

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

55.1

16

To build great wealth or very high income

54.7

27

23

To continue a family tradition

27.9

26

70.1

11

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

69.6

23

Fear of failure (opportunity)

44.9

22

Entrepreneurial intentions*

46.1

7

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

8.0

4

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

0.5

42

Always consider social impact

88.1

9

Always consider environmental impact

91.9

4

Industry (% TEA in business services)

16.9

30

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

27.0

4

25.2

28.9

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

7.3

19

5.8

8.8

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

51.6

21

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

67.5

4

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

75.4

6

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

63.3

5

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.3 (4/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.5 (12/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.2 (15/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.9 (4/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Chile
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.9 (7/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.1 (10/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.3 (4/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.4 (14/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.2 (4/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.3 (9/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.3 (11/16)

122

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.6 (9/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.2 (5/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn November 2022, consumer price inflation in Chile
was just over 13%, with unemployment around 8%.
On the supply side, increases in business costs haveaffected liquidity, access to credit and business growthstrategies. On the demand side, consumption has
fallen.
In January 2022, the Ministry of Economy launched
the “Digitalízate Kit” platform to provide SMEs andentrepreneurs access to growth tools including digitalmarketing, e-commerce, shipping and despatch,means of payment, connectivity, and cybersecurity.
Then, in July 2022, the same Ministry launched the
Cooperatives and Trade Associations Strengthening
Program, providing financial support for creating
new cooperatives and for strengthening thecompetitiveness of existing ones, as well as for SME
associations.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Despite some turmoil in its Framework Condition
scores since 2021, with six decreasing, four increasing
and two the same, losses largely balanced gains,so that Chile’s overall score for the quality of
its entrepreneurial environment (its National
Entrepreneurial Context Index, or NECI), remained
unchanged at 4.5. This placed Chile 29th of 51
economies, a fall from the 26th achieved with thesame score in 2021 because of improvements in othereconomies. Chile’s NECI score has hardly changed inrecent years, having been 4.6 in 2019 and 4.4 in 2020,
so there is no evidence of any significant pandemic
effect. This finding is supported by a score of 5.4,
sufficient but not outstanding, for the assessment ofrecovery from the economic effects of COVID-19.
Individual framework scores have worsened
since 2021 for both finance conditions, and all three
government policy and program conditions. The
latter is especially disappointing in an economy
with a history of strong governmental support forentrepreneurship. However, both entrepreneurial
education scores improved in 2022.
In terms of Framework Condition scores, Chilesits firmly in the centre of the Level B economies,
with six scores better than the Level B average,
six worse and one the same. Compared to the fullgroup of 51 GEM economies in 2022, Chile’s best

rank was 17th for Government Policy: Taxes And
Bureaucracy, contrasting with 47th for Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance. The latter is unfortunate
considering full economic recovery is likely to needsignificant investment in new businesses.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Chile has a well-earned reputation forentrepreneurship that is likely to be enhanced by its
2022 GEM results. About a quarter of adults invested
in someone else’s startup in 2022, a level that hasremained high throughout the pandemic, whilealmost a half of adults intend to start a business in thenext three years, a proportion that faltered at the onsetof the pandemic but has been increasing since.
In 2022, more than two-thirds of adults knew
someone who has recently started a new business,and even more considered they have the skills andexperience to do so themselves. Half of all adults saw
good opportunities to start a business locally, butalmost a half of these would be deterred from doing soby the fear of failure.
The percentage of adults in Chile starting or runninga new business fell from over a third to a quarter at
the start of the pandemic (2019 to 2020), and wasjust a little more in 2022. Men remain more likely tostart a new business than women, though not bymuch. EBO also fell at the start of the pandemic, and,despite increasing recently, remains well below the
pre-pandemic level (7.3% in 2022 compared to 10.6% in2019). The ratio of new to established businesses hasremained stable at around three to one. Identifying
the obstacles that are preventing new businesses
from becoming established, some of which may beclear from the previous section, should be importantto policymakers keen to enhance Chile’s stock ofbusinesses.
Unlike in its larger neighbour Brazil, the percentageof new entrepreneurs with customers outside of
the country has been in decline recently, from 7%
in 2019 to less than 2% in 2020, although aroundthree in four new entrepreneurs expect to use moredigital technology in the next six months to sell theirproducts. Job expectations remained strong among
new entrepreneurs, with three in 10 expecting to add
six or more new jobs in the next five years.

Institution

Other institutions involved

Team

APS vendor

Lead institution

Asociación de Emprendedores deChile

Team leader

Universidad del Desarrollo

Universidad Católica del Norte

Maribel Guerrero, PhD

Questio Estudios de Mercado y
Opinión Limitada

Universidad Técnica Federico Santa
María

Team members

Universidad Católica de la Santísima
Concepción
Type of institution

Universidad de la Frontera

University

Universidad de Aysén

Claudia Yáñez-ValdésContact
gem@udd.cl

Funders
Universidad del Desarrollo

Websitehttps://www.udd.cl

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report123ECONOMY PROFILEChina
Q Population (2021): 1,412.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 19.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

56.3

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

56.5

24

It is easy to start a business

25.9

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

20

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

14.7

47

To build great wealth or very high income

60.9

22

46

To continue a family tradition

27.2

27=

54.4

28

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

60.3

32

Fear of failure (opportunity)

56.7

3

Entrepreneurial intentions*

6.4

43=

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.2

40=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

1.1

42

Always consider social impact

78.4

23

Always consider environmental impact

85.8

12

Industry (% TEA in business services)

8.5

38

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

6.0

44=

5.0

6.9

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

3.2

43

2.9

3.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

73.7

6

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

84.2

1

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

36.9

40

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

31.3

40

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
6.4 (2/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.6 (3/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.2 (2/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.3 (1/13)

9
8
7
6
5

China
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
6.3 (2/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.4 (4/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.5 (1/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.0 (3/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.6 (2/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.1 (5/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.9 (2/13)

124

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.9 (3/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.8 (6/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
China’s economy grew by less than 3% in Q2 2022,
followed by nearly 4% in Q3. This is significantly
lower growth than before the pandemic, although
there is little sign the pandemic has added toinflation. However, business uncertainty may deter
entrepreneurship in the near future.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
China last participated in GEM in 2019, so we are able to
make some comparisons pre- and post-pandemic.
In 2019, there were 12 Entrepreneurial Framework
Conditions. China was scored by its national experts assufficient or better (≥5.0) in 11. By 2022, this had fallen
to eight sufficient conditions, with Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School, Research and Development
Transfers and Ease of Entry: Burdens and Regulation
now scored as insufficient. As a result, the overall score
for the quality of China’s entrepreneurial environment
in the National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI)
fell from 5.9 in 2019 (ranked 4th) to 5.6 in 2022 (ranked11th).
There is no doubt that China has been severely
impacted by the pandemic. Nevertheless, it isimpressive that it still had four Framework Conditions
ranked among the top 10 of the 51 economies, and justthree in the bottom half of those ranks. The experts
scored China’s recovery from the economic effectsof the pandemic at 4.9, just less than sufficient, andranked 41st of these economies.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
More than seven out of 10 adults in China reported that
their household income was lower in 2022 because of
the pandemic. Maybe because of this, the percentageof adults investing in someone else’s startup fell
from 9% to 6% over the period, while the proportion
intending to start their own business in the next three
years fell much more steeply, from 26% in 2019 tojust over 6% in 2022. This past year, more than half of
all adults knew someone who has recently started abusiness, or agreed they have the skills and experienceto start a business themselves. A similar proportion
saw good opportunities to start a business locally,
although well over half of the latter would not startthat business because of fear of failure.
The percentage of adults starting or running a new
business had fallen from 9% in 2019 to 6% in 2022,
relatively low for a Level C economy. Men remain
more likely than women to be starting a business. The
proportion of adults running an established businesshad fallen dramatically over the same period, from
9% to just 3%. One consequence is that, while in 2019
there was just over one adult running an establishedbusiness for every adult starting a new one, by 2022
there were almost twice as many adults starting a new
business as running an established one.
In 2022 the dominant motivation agreed by new
entrepreneurs in China was “to build great wealth orvery high income”, closely followed by “earning a living
because jobs are scarce”. Relatively few entrepreneurs
agreed with the motivation of “making a differencein the world”. More than half of new entrepreneurs in
China expect to use more digital technology to sell
their products in the next six months. This could beaimed at customers outside China, since the shareof new entrepreneurs with customers beyond theircountry had fallen sharply, from 18% to just 4%. Despite
this, one in five of those new entrepreneurs expected
to employ an additional six people or more in five
years’ time.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

ShanghaiTech University

N/A

ShanghaiTech University

Yu Yang
Team members

Contact

Suting Hongyangyu@shanghaitech.edu.cn

Guangwei Li
Type of institution
University
Websitehttps://www.shanghaitech.edu.cn/
eng/

Wenxin Xie
Qiao Yang
Xiyi Yang
Wen Zheng
Xiaoyu Zhou

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report125ECONOMY PROFILE

Colombia
Q Population (2021): 51.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 16.9 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

63.8

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

53.4

27=

It is easy to start a business

41.4

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

12

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

47.6

25

To build great wealth or very high income

54.0

28

32

To continue a family tradition

34.5

15

66.6

17

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

86.6

6

Fear of failure (opportunity)

38.5

39

Entrepreneurial intentions*

21.2

19

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

7.6

5

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

5.0

35

Always consider social impact

69.6

37

Always consider environmental impact

76.3

25=

Industry (% TEA in business services)

8.2

39

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

28.0

2

26.1

30.1

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

5.1

34

4.0

6.2

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

73.0

7

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

50.6

15

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

62.3

11

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

51.2

15

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
6.1 (4/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.6 (8/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.5 (8/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.7 (7/13)

9
8
7
6
5

Colombia
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.5 (6/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.3 (5/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.5 (10/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.3 (6/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.0 (4/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.6 (8/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.3 (6/13)

126

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.4 (5/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.7 (2/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn 2022, economic growth in Colombia reached over
7%, but was expected to slow down in 2023. Despite
this growth, employment was not yet restored to
pre-pandemic levels, and unemployment was almost
10%, although down on the previous year. Informality
was high, with GEM Colombia estimating that just overa third of new entrepreneurs, and just over a half ofestablished entrepreneurs, were registered with the
Chamber of Commerce.
Inflation in 2022 was expected to have exceeded 12%,with rising costs meaning entrepreneurs were having
to adopt new ways of thinking and acting strategicallyin order to survive.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022, Colombia’s quality of Entrepreneurial
Framework Conditions, as assessed by a group of its
own national experts, declined in the six conditions
most closely related to government: Government
Entrepreneurial Programs, entrepreneurial education
at all levels and PhysicalInfrastructure. Largely as aresult, the assessed quality of its overall entrepreneurial
environment, as measured by its National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score, declined
from 4.7 in 2022 (23rd) to 4.5 in 2022 (28th). Any further
decline was averted by small improvements in anotherthree assessed conditions: Entrepreneurial Finance; theEase of Entry: Burdens and Regulation; and Social andCultural Norms.
Just five Framework Conditions were assessed as
sufficient (≥5.0) in 2022, down from six the previous
year. Colombia’s Framework Conditions were firmly inthe middle of the Level C group average, exceedingthat average in five conditions and falling beneath it inseven.
The impact of the pandemic on Colombia’s
entrepreneurial environment is difficult to assess, with
its NECI score rising at the onset of the pandemic(from 4.2 in 2019 to 4.6 in 2020), rising again to 4.7 in
2021 and then falling in 2022.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
It is evident that Colombia has been hard hit by the
pandemic, with more than seven out of 10 adults
reporting that the pandemic had reduced their

Institution
Lead institution
Universidad Icesi

household income in 2022. Perhaps as a result, thepercentage of adults in Colombia investing in someone
else’s new business has been falling since 2020,
from 9% then to 4% in 2022. The proportion of adults
intending to start a business in the next three years
has also declined over this period, from 43% in 2020 to
21% in 2022. This is despite two-thirds of adults in 2022
knowing someone who has recently started a businessand a similar proportion believing they have the skills
and experience to start a business themselves. Morethan half of adults saw good opportunities to start abusiness locally, although a third of these would not do
so because of fear of failure.
Both the percentage of adults starting or runninga new business and the percentage running anestablished business in Colombia have proved highly
volatile in the pandemic cycle. The former actually
increased between 2019 and 2020 (from 22% to 31%),
then fell dramatically to 16% in 2021 before rising again
to 28% in 2022. Female new entrepreneurship has
moved more or less in line with the males, so a small
gender gap has persisted. EBO followed a similar, if lessextreme, pattern to new entrepreneurship, rising at thestart of the pandemic, then more than halving in 2021
before mostly recovering in 2022. Colombia still has
five adults starting or running a new business for every
Established Business Owner, a ratio that has been fairly
stable in recent years. There appear to be some serious
obstacles preventing new business transitioning into
established ones: the Framework Conditions review
offered no shortage of possibilities.
Unlike in Brazil and Chile, a relatively highproportion of new entrepreneurs in Colombia havecustomers outside of the country, although this has
dropped from 21% in 2020 to 16% in 2022. Almost two
out of three new entrepreneurs expected to use moredigital technology in the next six months to sell theirproducts, and the share expecting to employ six ormore additional people in five years’ time was relatively
high at just over a quarter, but well down on the one
half of three years ago.
“Earning a living because jobs are scarce”, notsurprisingly, remained the most commonly agreed
motivation for new entrepreneurs, chosen by almost
nine out of 10, although “making a difference in theworld” was also chosen by more than a half of the newentrepreneurs.

Type of institution

Fabian Osorio

University

Nathaly Pinzón

Websitewww.gemcolombia.org

Mariangela López
Andrea Cajigas
Jana Schmutzler

Team

Liyis Gomez

Team leader

Jairo Orozco
Leon Dario Parra

Universidad del Norte

Ana Carolina Martínez Romero(Universidad Icesi)

Universidad EAN

Team members

Funders

Pontificia Universidad Javeriana de
Cali

Institución Universitaria Americana
iNNpulsa Colombia

Jhon Alexander Moreno BarragánFernando Pereira Laverde

Vera Santiago Martínez

Universidad Icesi

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Pontificia Universidad Javeriana deCali
Universidad del Norte
Institución Universitaria Americana
Universidad EAN

APS vendor
INFO Investigaciones S.A.S.

Contact
acmarti@icesi.edu.co127

ECONOMY PROFILE

Croatia
Q Population (2021): 3.9 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 33.8 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

66.5

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

60.0

21

It is easy to start a business

34.0

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

8

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

40.8

31=

To build great wealth or very high income

48.8

32

39

To continue a family tradition

26.7

29

73.6

9

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

70.2

21

Fear of failure (opportunity)

48.6

16

Entrepreneurial intentions*

19.5

21

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

3.4

17

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

25.1

4

Always consider social impact

81.0

19

Always consider environmental impact

82.5

18=

Industry (% TEA in business services)

32.7

13

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

13.2

17

9.5

17.0

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

3.4

42

2.5

4.3

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

19.3

48

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

32.2

38

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

50.1

26

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

34.8

36

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.4 (15/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.8 (4/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.1 (6/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.5 (13/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Croatia
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.1 (10/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.8 (13/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.7 (12/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
6.5 (3/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.9 (10/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.0 (11/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.4 (10/16)

128

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.9 (6/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
3.8 (14/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPWith the help of government support for businesses,
the Croatian economy survived the global healthcrisis, and is getting through the global energy crisis
without losing many jobs. Real GDP is expected tohave grown by more than 6% in 2022, while inflation
edged above 10%. This inflation is challenging businesssupply chains and reducing the purchasing power ofconsumers.
Since 2020, the Croatian government has intervened
to support micro, small and medium-sized businesses,with interventions to support jobs extended into 2022.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Croatia has a relatively weak entrepreneurial
environment, with 10 of 13 conditions rated as
insufficient (<5.0) in 2022. Nevertheless, that
entrepreneurial environment is improving, with
11 individual conditions seeing their assessments
improve in 2022 compared to 2021. As a result, thequality of Croatia’s entrepreneurial environment
pushed its overall National Entrepreneurship Context
Index (NECI) score up from 3.9 in 2021 to 4.1 in 2022,
improving Croatia’s ranking from 43rd to 39th among
GEM economies.
Most of the individual framework score
improvements were modest, with the largest
being for Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics. The twoframework scores that fell over the period werefor Government Entrepreneurial Programs and forPhysicalInfrastructure. There are clearly considerable
efforts being made to improve Croatia’s Framework
Conditions, including entrepreneurial finance andeducation, but there is a long way to go to makeCroatia an encouraging and supportive place in whichto start and grow a business.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
In 2022, one in five adults in Croatia reported that theirhousehold income was reduced by the pandemic,
more or less half of the level in 2020. Relatively few
Institution
Lead institution
J.J. Strossmayer University in Osijek,
Faculty of Economics (EFOS)

Other institutions involved

Funders

APS vendor

CEPOR — SMEs andEntrepreneurship Policy
Centre http://www.cepor.hr/
gem-globalentrepreneurship-monitor/

Ministry of Economy and Sustainable
Development

IPSOS d.o.o., Zagreb

Croatian Banking Association

ContactTeam
ZNANJEM DO IZVRSNOSTIType of institution

Team leader
Team members

WebsiteProf. Nataša Šarlija, PhD

http://www.ices.hr/en/gem

CEPOR SME & Entrepreneurship
Policy Centre

singer@efos.hr

J.J. Strossmayer University in Osijek,
Faculty of Economics

Prof. Slavica Singer, PhD

University
http://www.efos.unios.hr

Croatian adults invest in someone else’s new business,at around 6%, a figure that has been consistentthroughout the pandemic cycle. However, theproportion intending to start their own business inthe next three years rose in the early stages of thepandemic, from 26% in 2019 to 31% in 2020, before
falling steadily back to 20% in 2022.
Croatian adults have good awareness ofentrepreneurship and are not lacking confidence intheir own abilities. More than two out of three know
someone who has started a business recently, while
three-quarters consider they have the skills andexperience to start their own. Three in five see good
opportunities to start a business locally, although
about a half of these would be deterred by fear of
failure.
As with business intentions, the percentage ofadults starting or running their own business has
mostly been rising throughout the pandemic, from
10.5% in 2019 to 13.2% in 2022. Men remain more likely
to be starting a new business, with seven men startinga new business for every four women doing the samein 2022. The proportion of established businesses isrelatively low in Croatia (3.4% in 2022), little changed
from the start of the pandemic. As a result, the ratioof new to established businesses has increased
from three to one in 2019 to four to one in 2022. The
long-term failure to convert new into establishedbusinesses is a concern.
More than seven out of 10 Croatian new
entrepreneurs agree with the motivation “to earn aliving because jobs are scarce”, which has dominatedagreement since this question was introduced by
GEM in 2019. Meanwhile, the proportion of new
entrepreneurs with customers beyond Croatia has
been rising, from four in 10 in 2019 to more than ahalf in 2022. A similar proportion expect to use moredigital technologies to sell their products in the next
six months, and job expectations are fairly strong, witharound a quarter expecting to employ another six ormore people in five years’ time, more or less the same
proportion as in 2019.

Prof. Sanja Pfeifer, PhD
Prof. Sunčica Oberman Peterka, PhD

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report129

ECONOMY PROFILE

CyprusQ Population (2021): 1.2 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 42.6 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

82.4

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

26.8

47

It is easy to start a business

48.4

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)% TEA

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

45.3

28

To build great wealth or very high income

78.3

9

24=

To continue a family tradition

25.4

31

52.7

34

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

60.5

31

Fear of failure (opportunity)

51.7

9

Entrepreneurial intentions*

18.3

22

2

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

2.7

21=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

21.7

9

Always consider social impact

73.4

28

Always consider environmental impact

70.2

36

Industry (% TEA in business services)

27.1

18

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

8.3

34=

4.9

11.7

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

5.7

29=

3.9

7.6

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

44.7

26

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

56.5

10

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

53.0

24

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

40.1

29

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.3 (16/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.4 (22/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.0 (20/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.4 (20/22)

9
8
7
6
5

CyprusLevel A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.7 (13/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.6 (17/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.0 (14/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.1 (12/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.6 (22/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.4 (16/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.9 (21/22)

130

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.5 (21/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.3 (19/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPGDP in Cyprus is expected to have grown by justunder 4% in 2022, with unemployment falling to justabove 7%. Business margins were under pressure,with increases in costs only partially passed on to
consumers.
The government introduced its “Action Plan 2022” toattract businesses in key sectors including technology,
shipping, biogenetics and biotechnology.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
National experts’ assessment of the overall quality ofCyprus’s entrepreneurial environment showed somesmall improvement in 2022 compared to 2021, with
its National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI)
score rising from 4.2 to 4.3, pushing Cyprus’s ranking
among GEM economies from 37th to 33rd. In 2021,
Cyprus had 10 of 13 Framework Conditions assessed as
insufficient (<5.0), but by 2022 this had fallen to nine, as
improvements in internal market dynamics drove thiscondition into sufficiency. The assessment of Cyprus’s
recovery from the economic effects of the pandemic
was largely positive, with a well-sufficient score of 5.5.
Cyprus’s individual Framework Conditions arehighly variable in quality, with one ranked in the top
20 among the 51 economies participating in the 2022
GEM National Expert Survey (NES): Government Policy:
Support and Relevance, and with three ranked in
the bottom 10: Entrepreneurial Finance, Government
Entrepreneurial Programs and Physical Infrastructure.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The percentage of adults starting or running a new
business declined by almost a third at the start ofthe pandemic, from 12.2% to 8.6% between 2019and 2021. This number is now at 8.3% in 2022. Thisaverage masks some gender differences, with female
entrepreneurship falling faster. In 2019, there wereseven men starting or running a new business in
Cyprus for every four women doing so. By 2022, thisratio had increased to more than nine men for every
four women.
The level of EBO has followed a similar pattern
to new entrepreneurship, falling at the onset of theInstitution
Lead institution
University of Cyprus (UCY)
Centre for Entrepreneurship (C4E)

Type of institution
University
Websitehttp://www.ucy.ac.cy/en
https://www.c4e.org.cy
Other institutions involved
Ministry of Energy, Commerce andIndustry

pandemic, some slight recovery and then further falls.
By 2022, just 5.7% of adults in Cyprus were running anestablished business, almost half of its level in 2019. A
relatively high 44% of Cypriot adults in 2022 reported
that their household income was lower because of
the pandemic, back to the levels of the onset of thepandemic in 2020, when the intervening year had seensome fall in that percentage.
Few Cypriots invest in someone else’s new business,
although even this small proportion fell in the earlydays of the pandemic, with some recovery since. The
percentage of adults intending to start a new businessin the next three years is much larger, but has followed
a similar pattern, falling from 25% in 2019 to 23% in2020 and then to 17% in 2021, before a partial recovery
to 18% in 2022.
Despite the falls in entrepreneurial activity,
the proportion of adults in Cyprus who know anentrepreneur has increased steadily over the last
four years, from just over half in 2019 to more thanfour out of five in 2020. The proportion of adults
agreeing they have the skills and experience to start
their own business has remained stable at just over
one in two. Paradoxically, the proportion seeing
good opportunities to start a business locally fell
substantially with the onset of the pandemic, before
recovering strongly in 2021 and falling back in 2022,
ending the period at 27%, having been 39% before thepandemic in 2019.
The motive “to build great wealth or very highincome” has dominated agreement among newentrepreneurs in Cyprus since these questions wereintroduced by GEM in 2019, with “earning a living
because jobs are scarce” not far behind.
Finally, Cyprus is a relatively small island
economy, so its new entrepreneurs are likely toseek customers beyond its borders. The data shows
recent success in doing so, with 29% having suchcustomers in 2021, rising to 44% in 2022. More thanhalf of new entrepreneurs expect, in the next six
months, to use more digital technology to sell
their products, and job expectations are strong,with almost one in three expecting to employ anadditional six or more people in the next five years,
from just over one in five in 2019.

Team

Funders

Team leader

Ministry of Energy Commerce andIndustry

Panos Markopoulos
Team members
Ariana Polyviou
Constantinos M. Savvides

PwC Cyprus

APS vendor
Cypronetwork

Contact
markopoulos.panos@ucy.ac.cy

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report131

ECONOMY PROFILE

Egypt
Q Population (2021): 104.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 13.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

32.9

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

63.7

15=

It is easy to start a business

67.7

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

46

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

58.7

13

To build great wealth or very high income

71.9

13

9=

To continue a family tradition

52.6

4

62.8

22=

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

84.8

9

Fear of failure (opportunity)

50.6

12

Entrepreneurial intentions*

47.3

5

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.7

30=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

2.3

42

Always consider social impact

79.7

20

Always consider environmental impact

77.2

23

Industry (% TEA in business services)

7.4

41

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

6.6

41

3.7

9.4

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

2.6

46=

1.1

4.0

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

72.4

8

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

35.2

33

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

64.0

9

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

43.5

25

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.2 (6/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.2 (4/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.3 (4/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.6 (4/13)

9
8
7
6
5

Egypt
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.3 (7/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.5 (3/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.7 (8/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
6.3 (5/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.7 (9/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.0 (6/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.8 (8/13)

132

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.3 (6/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
3.6 (11/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe deterioration of the global economy has hit theEgypt economy hard, with increases in the costs offood imports, supply chain disruptions and falls incurrency reserves leading to the steep devaluationof the Egyptian pound. High inflation, devaluation
and rising interest rates have all intensified cash flowpressures on new and small businesses. In 2022, thegovernment issued a new fintech law to expand thescope of non-banking financial services, and several
venture capital funds were launched, some supported
by state banks.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Egypt scored highly for both Physical Infrastructure(6.6) and Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics (6.3),
both at levels usually associated with high-income
economies, and was ranked 20th and 13th respectivelyout of 51 GEM economies. Its Ease of Entry: Market
Dynamics score had risen sharply from the previous
year, suggesting strong growth in domestic
markets post-pandemic. It also scored as sufficientor better (≥5.0) for Social and Cultural Norms andCommercial and Professional Infrastructure, but asless than sufficient for the other nine Framework
Conditions. Research and Development Transfers andEntrepreneurial Education Post-School ranked 46th
and 47th of the 51 economies, both well down froma year earlier. Entrepreneurial Education at Schoolscored lowest of all Egypt’s Framework Conditions atjust 2.3. Sadly, scores for this condition are so low across
many economies that Egypt was far from bottom.
Egypt’s overall quality of entrepreneurial
environment score as determined by the National
Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI) was 4.3, slightly
down from a year earlier. But that was enough to move
Egypt from 28th to 32nd in the overall ranking. In the
new questions in the 2022 National Expert Survey,
Egypt scored as better than sufficient for COVID
recovery, consistent with growth in domestic markets,
Institution

but as less than sufficient in terms of actions to
support the United Nations Sustainable Development
Goals, which is disconcerting for a nation that hosted
the UN Climate Change Conference (COP27) at Sharm
El-Sheikh in November 2022.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The proportion of adults starting or running a new
business in Egypt has been falling steadily since2020, from 11% to 7% in 2022, now comparable topre-pandemic levels. This is true of both male andfemale entrepreneurship, with the ratio of more than
two new male to one female starting new businesses
remaining roughly constant through that period. At atime when entrepreneurial gender gaps are narrowing
in much of the Arab world, Egypt’s remains stubbornly
wide. More positively, almost two-thirds of thosestarting or running a new business in Egypt expect touse more digital technology to sell their products inthe next six months.
The fall in new business starts reflects the decline inbusiness intentions throughout the pandemic period,
down from the 63% of adults expecting to start a new
business in the next three years in 2019 to just 47%
in 2022. Similarly, the proportion of adults knowing
someone who has recently started a business fell inthe same period, from more than one in two to lessthan one in three. Despite this, over half of Egyptian
adults see good local opportunities to start a business,while three out of five consider they have the skills andexperience to start a business themselves. However, of
those seeing good opportunities, two in five would bedeterred by fear of failure. Egypt continues to have oneof the lowest levels of EBO, halving to just 2.6% in 2022.
Not surprisingly, “to earn a living because jobs are
scarce” is the dominant motive by far among new
Egyptian entrepreneurs, although “continuing a family
tradition” was agreed as a motive by more than half of
new entrepreneurs.

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

PHI Knowledge

The American University in Cairo —School of BusinessProf. Ayman Ismail, PhD

The American University in Cairo —School of Business
Drosos Foundation

Contact

Team members
Dr. Shima Barakat, PhD
Dr. Hakim Adel Hakim Meshreki, PhD

Type of institution
Business School

aymanism@aucegypt.edu

Seham Ghalwash, MSc
Prof. Ahmed Tolba
Prof. Thomas Schøtt, PhD

Websitehttps://business.aucegypt.edu
Other institutions involved
Ministry of Energy, Commerce andIndustry

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report133

ECONOMY PROFILE

FranceQ Population (2021): 67.5 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 50.7 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

59.7

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

52.4

29=

It is easy to start a business

55.4

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

15

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

23.7

43

To build great wealth or very high income

42.3

42

19

To continue a family tradition

22.2

39

49.8

36=

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

42.6

43

Fear of failure (opportunity)

41.0

35=

Entrepreneurial intentions*

15.8

26

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

2.4

25

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

13.6

20

Always consider social impact

74.3

26

Always consider environmental impact

74.0

32

Industry (% TEA in business services)

33.9

10

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

9.2

29

7.3

11.2

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

2.9

44=

2.2

3.7

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

32.4

35

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

29.5

40

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

17.6

49

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

39.7

30

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.1 (17/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.6 (8/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.6 (6/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.9 (12/22)

9
8
7
6
5

FranceLevel A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
6.0 (5/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.6 (16/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.1 (13/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
3.7 (21/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.9 (11/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.0 (11/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.1 (19/22)

134

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.8 (17/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.5 (7/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe French economy was expected to grow by almost
3% in 2022, with inflation and unemployment both justabove 7%. Rising prices were reducing consumption
and squeezing business margins. New measures to help
small businesses in France included some simplificationsof business regulations and improved eligibility ofself-employed people for unemployment insurance.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Despite strong government support forentrepreneurship, France has long held an ambivalentapproach regarding individual and collective success,perhaps reflected in the relatively low score for the
Framework Condition Social and Cultural Norms,
in which France ranked 39th out of 51 economies
participating in the GEM National Expert Survey (NES).
France scored sufficient or better (≥5.0) for eight of 13
Framework Conditions, resulting in an overall National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score of 5.1 forits entrepreneurial environment, matching its overall
score for 2021. However, improving scores in othereconomies pushed France down the NECI league
table, from 13th in 2021 to 18th in 2022. France scoredhigher than the Level A average for seven framework
conditions, but much worse in two: Entrepreneurial
Education at School and Ease of Entry: Market
Dynamics. In the latter, the French score was just threeplaces above the lowest of all 51 economies.
In 2022, France scored worse in nine framework
conditions, with just three improving their scoresand one unchanged. However, most differences were
small, except for Research and Development Transfers,
where the score fell from 4.7 to 4.1. In terms of the newquestions in the NES, France scored relatively highly,with well-above-sufficient scores of 6.3 for post-COVID
recovery, and 6.4 for actions in support of the United
Nations Sustainable Development Goals, the latterbeing the fifth highest score of all 51 economies.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
In 2022, under one in five French adults expected
to start a business in the next five years, up a little
from 2021, as was the proportion of adults investing

Institution
Lead institution
Labex Entreprendre (Entrepreneurship)

Type of institution

Team members

Research InstituteJean-Marie Courrent

University

Walid Nakara

Business School

Sylvie Sammut

WebsiteUniversity of Montpellier

Montpellier Business School

in someone else’s new business (7% in 2022). The
percentage of adults starting or running a new
business rose to 9.2% in 2022 from 7.7% a year
earlier. Most of this increase reflected a rise in maleentrepreneurship (from 8.4 to 11.2%), whereas female
entrepreneurship was little changed (from 7.1 to7.3%). As a result, the French entrepreneurial gender
gap widened, with around three men starting or
running a new business for every two women doing
the same.
In 2022, three out of five adults in France knew
someone who had recently started a business,while a half of adults saw good opportunities tostart a business locally, and a similar proportion
considered they have the skills and experience to do sothemselves. However, two out of five of those who saw
good conditions to start would be deterred by the fearof failure.
The rate of EBO amongst French adults was
relatively low in 2021, at 3.6%, and fell further in 2022
to 2.9%, implying more than three adults starting a
new business for every adult running an establishedone. This may suggest that there are obstacles intransitioning to new to established businesses. Theseobstacles could include the dominance of markets by
established providers.
Three out of 10 French adults reported that theirhousehold income had fallen in 2022 because of thepandemic. A majority of new entrepreneurs in France
had agreed with the motivation “to earn a living
because jobs are scarce” in 2021. That proportion fellin 2022, and agreement with this motivation wasmatched with the motivation of “to build great wealthor very high income”, both agreed by just over two infive new entrepreneurs.
France scores well in terms of the potential
impacts of its new entrepreneurs, with more than athird reporting that they had customers outside of
the country and with a quarter expecting to employ
another six or more people in five years’ time. One noteof caution is that just 18% of those new entrepreneurs
expect to use more digital technologies to sell theirproducts in the next six months, although that is an
improvement from just 9% in 2021. These figures may
be related to already high levels of digitalization, and awell-equipped IT infrastructure overall.

https://labex-entreprendre.edu.
umontpellier.fr/en/home-2/

Roy Thurik
Olivier Torres
Sophie Casanova

https://www.umontpellier.fr/en/

Justine Valette

https://www.montpellier-bs.com/
international/

Funders

Team

Labex Entreprendre

Team leader

Montpellier Business School

University of Montpellier

Frank Lasch and Karim Messeghem

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

APS vendor
Le Terrain, Paris

Contact
f.lasch@montpellier-bs.com
karim.messeghem@umontpellier.fr
jean-marie.courrent@umontpellier.fr
w.nakara@montpellier-bs.com
sylvie.sammut@umontpellier.fr
r.thurik@montpellier-bs.com
olivier.torres@umontpellier.fr
sophie.casanova@umontpellier.fr
justine.valette@umontpellier.fr

135ECONOMY PROFILE

Germany
Q Population (2021): 83.1 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 57.9 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

34.2

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

39.5

41

It is easy to start a business

34.6

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

44

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

42.8

30

To build great wealth or very high income

47.8

35

38

To continue a family tradition

32.9

19

36.2

47

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

47.2

39

Fear of failure (opportunity)

44.3

24

Entrepreneurial intentions*

6.5

42

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.2

40=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

22.0

8

Always consider social impact

61.1

44

Always consider environmental impact

54.5

47

Industry (% TEA in business services)

29.9

15

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

9.1

30=

7.1

11.0

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

3.6

40

2.6

4.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

31.7

37

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

40.2

28

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

46.0

32

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

45.5

24

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.7 (14/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.4 (9/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.0 (10/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.0 (17/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Germany
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.6 (14/22)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.8 (13/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.9 (16/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.4 (8/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.6 (3/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.3 (6/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.9 (9/22)

136

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.7 (19/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.9 (14/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPInflation in Germany was around 10% in November
2022, with unemployment just over 5% and GDP
growth of just under 3%, down a little on the previous
year. The shortage of skilled labour, related to anageing society, remains a serious constraint on theGerman economy. Rising prices are an issue foryoung firms, both in procurement and in the sales of
their own products. Unlike larger, more establishedcompanies, young firms have few opportunities tocompensate revenue losses with sales of other (own)products.
Some policy support measures introduced to help
businesses in the pandemic have been continued,
offering considerable financial support.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Unlike many of her neighbours, most of Germany’s
Entrepreneurial Framework Condition scores
were little changed in 2022 compared to one year
earlier. The largest change was a fall in the score for
Entrepreneurial Education Post-School, pushingthat score below sufficiency (<5.0). However, thiswas offset by small increases in other Framework
Condition scores, leaving Germany’s overall
National Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI)
score unchanged at 5.1, just better than sufficient.
Nevertheless, improvements in NECI scores in othereconomies pushed Germany a little further down theentrepreneurial environment league table, from 14th
to 17th.
In common with many economies at all income
levels, Germany’s lowest Framework Condition
score was again for Entrepreneurial Education at
School, a score that fell yet further in 2022. It remains
disappointing that so many economies continue tounder-invest in this area. Last year’s Global Report
noted that Germany’s score for Physical Infrastructure
declined slowly over time. This trend continued in 2022,with Germany scoring 6.0 for a Framework Condition
that had been 6.5 in 2019. However, Germany’s highest
Framework Condition score was, for the second
year running, for the quality of her Government
Entrepreneurial Programs, with that score improvingfrom last year. So very much a mixed picture, but withvery little change overall.
Institution
Lead institution
Institute of Economic and Cultural
Geography at the Leibniz University
HannoverRKW Kompetenzzentrum Eschborn

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The share of German adults reporting a decreasein household income due to the pandemic in 2022
increased to three in 10, from two in 10 a year earlier.
The share of German adults intending to start theirown business in the next three years, which had fallenfrom 13% before the pandemic (2019) to 9% in 2021,
rose to 10% in 2022. While the percentage of adults
investing in someone else’s new business had also
fallen early in the pandemic (from 5% to 4%), it has
since recovered strongly, reaching 8% in 2022.
In 2022, just over a third of German adults knew
someone who had recently started a new business,with a similar proportion considering themselvesto have the skills and experience to do so as well.
However, while two out of five of those adults saw
good conditions to start a business locally, nearly ahalf would be deterred by fear of failure.
Having fallen significantly in the early years of
the pandemic, the percentage of adults starting or
running a new business in Germany has recovered
strongly since, reaching 9.1% in 2022, above thepre-pandemic level of 7.6% in 2019. EBO has faredless well, despite rising slightly in the first year of thepandemic (from 5.2% in 2019 to 6.2% in 2020). It has
fallen steadily since then, to just 3.6% in 2022. In 2019,
the German level of EBO had exceeded the level of
new business starts. By 2022, there were more than
two people starting or running a new business forevery Established Business Owner.
Agreement was fairly evenly split among newGerman entrepreneurs across all four defined
motivations, with “to earn a living because jobs
are scarce” just about highest among newentrepreneurs in Germany in 2022. Almost a third of
new entrepreneurs had customers outside of theircountry, a relatively high figure but well down from
more than a half in 2019. At the same time, almost
half of new entrepreneurs were expecting to use
more digital technology in the next six months tosell their products, and almost as many expected to
employ six or more additional people in five years’
time.

Team

Funders

Government funded transfer
institution

Team leader

RKW Competence Centre

WebsiteTeam members

https://www.iwkg.uni-hannover.de

Matthias Wallisch

https://www.rkw-kompetenzzentrum.
de/Natalia Gorynia-Pfeffer

Type of institution
University

Prof. Dr. Rolf Sternberg

APS vendor
UADS Institut für Umfragen, Analysen
und DataScience GmbH

Armin Baharian
Lennard Stolz
Julia Schauer
Christi Degen

Contactsternberg@wigeo.uni-hannover.de

Florian Täube

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report137ECONOMY PROFILE

GreeceQ Population (2021): 10.7 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 31.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

28.5

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

36.4

43

It is easy to start a business

31.9

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

48

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

23.5

44

To build great wealth or very high income

56.7

25

42

To continue a family tradition

39.6

10

53.8

31

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

63.6

29

Fear of failure (opportunity)

49.5

14

Entrepreneurial intentions*

8.3

40=

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.0

45

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

19.1

14

Always consider social impact

72.2

30

Always consider environmental impact

77.1

24

Industry (% TEA in business services)

17.4

29

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

4.9

47

3.4

6.3

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

13.3

3

10.2

16.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

58.1

16

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

40.3

27

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

47.3

29

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

21.2

44

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.2 (9/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.2 (6/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.1 (7/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.9 (10/16)

9
8
7
6
5

GreeceLevel B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.4 (3/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.8 (4/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.7 (8/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.0 (10/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.5 (8/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.6 (7/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.9 (3/16)

138

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.0 (4/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.0 (13/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPGreece’s economy shrank in Q3 2022 compared to thesecond quarter, as declining net exports and public
spending offset strong tourism. The country’s GDP
growth slowed down to 2.8% year-on-year. It looks
likely the Greek economy will have grown by less than
5% in 2022.
While unemployment has been falling, inflation has
increased, reaching 9% in November 2022, mainly due
to energy price increases. Business margins are being
squeezed and profits are down. To reduce energy
costs, the government has adopted support measuresfor businesses (the fuel pass and the power pass), andreinforced the discount mechanism for electricity
tariffs.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Greece has continued its steady improvement inentrepreneurial framework conditions, with its qualityof overall entrepreneurial environment as measured
by the National Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI)
score increasing from 4.1 in 2019 to 4.6 in 2022, pushing
Greece up the NECI league table from 40th to 26th.
These improvements have largely been across theboard, with eight conditions improving their scores
since 2021, three scoring the same, and just two
scoring less. As a result, Greece had three conditions
scored as sufficient or better in 2022, and two morethat were very close to sufficient. The biggest increases
were for Ease of Entry: Burdens and Regulation andfor Commercial and Professional Infrastructure, while
the falls were for Government Policy: Support andRelevance and for Social and Cultural Norms.
Despite its Level B status, Greece ranked 12th of 51
economies for its score on Research and Development
Transfers and 19th for the improving Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation, but 42nd for Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School. Taken together with thelow score for Entrepreneurial Education at School,
education is clearly an area in which the government
might wish to facilitate some rapid improvements if
it is serious about the entrepreneurial environment in
Greece.
Institution
Lead institution
Foundation for Economic & Industrial
Research (FEIR/IOBE)

Websitehttp://iobe.gr
Other institutions involved
Laboratory of Industrial and Energy
Economics at the National Technical
University of athens
Department of Economics, Universityof Peloponnese

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
In 2022, less than one in 10 Greek adults intended tostart a business in the next three years, a proportion
that has fallen steadily from an already low base,while just one in 40 invested in someone else’s new
business, half the level of three years ago. Just overa quarter of Greek adults knew someone who had
started a business in the last three years, while one
in three saw good opportunities to start a businesslocally. More optimistically, over a half consideredthemselves to have the skills and experience to starta business, although more than half of these would
be deterred for fear it may fail. The upshot of all thisis that the proportion of adults starting or running
new business in Greece in 2022 was relatively low at
4.9%, having fallen sharply from 8.6% in 2020. Men
were nearly twice as likely as women to be startinga new business, whereas the gender difference had
been marginal in 2019. Women’s entrepreneurship has
more than halved since then, while men’s fell by lessthan a third.
Compared to its new businesses, Greece had one of
the highest levels of EBO at 13.3%. The level of EBO has
been fairly stable over the pandemic cycle, while therate of new businesses has fallen. In 2020, there were
17 adults running an established business for every 10
starting a new business — by 2022, this ratio had risen
to 27. Not only was the level of new starts falling, itappears to be increasingly difficult to transition these
new businesses into established ones.
“To earn a living because jobs are scarce” was themost commonly agreed motive for starting a business,followed by “To build great wealth or very highincome”. Relatively few Greek entrepreneurs appear
motivated “to make a difference in the world”, with lessthan one in four agreeing with this motive, althoughcontinuing a family tradition is relatively important in
Greece, agreed by two out of five new entrepreneurs in
2022.

Team

Funders

Team leader

EY Greece

Assoc. Prof. Aggelos Tsakanikas
Team members

APS vendor

Sofia Stavraki, MPhil, Phd Candidate

Datapower SA

Evangelia Valavanioti, Msc
Asst. Prof. Ioannis Giotopoulos

Type of institution

Contact
atsakanikas@iobe.gr

Research Institute

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report139ECONOMY PROFILE

Guatemala
Q Population (2021): 17.1 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 9.8 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

71.5

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

68.3

11

It is easy to start a business

47.8

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)% TEA

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

80.9

2=

To build great wealth or very high income

78.5

8

26

To continue a family tradition

52.4

5

77.5

6

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

89.1

4

Fear of failure (opportunity)

43.2

27

Entrepreneurial intentions*

46.5

6

4

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

8.6

3

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

6.2

33

Always consider social impact

93.3

1

Always consider environmental impact

93.5

2

Industry (% TEA in business services)

5.4

43

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

29.4

1

28.2

30.8

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

11.6

5

9.7

13.6

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

63.9

13

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

59.6

7

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

72.6

7

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

53.0

13

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.3 (5/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.0 (11/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.3 (9/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.3 (6/13)

9
8
7
6
5

GuatemalaLevel C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
2.4 (12/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.2 (6/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.5 (9/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
3.4 (13/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.1 (12/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.3 (3/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.5 (12/13)

140

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.3 (7/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.4 (4/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
Despite the pandemic, Guatemala has maintained astable macroeconomic performance. Inflation initiallycame from imported energy and food, but has sinceextended to local products and services. Entrepreneurs
have transferred inflation to the final prices of theirproducts and services. Congress passed a bankruptcy
law in February, which came into force in September,so it is too early to assess its impacts.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Despite national experts scoring Guatemala’s responseto the economic impacts of the pandemic fairly
highly, the assessed quality of the entrepreneurial
environment in Guatemala was little changed in
2022 compared to 2021. Both the quality of theoverall environment, as measured by the National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score, andsix individual Framework Condition scores, were
unchanged. That NECI score (3.8) placed Guatemala
44th out of 50 economies in 2021 and 43rd out of 51
economies in 2022.
Across a large number of Framework Conditions(eight in 2021, the same in 2022), Guatemala scores
poorly (<4.0), and in some conditions (four in 2021,
three in 2022) very poorly (<3.0). In 2022 these threewere Government Policy: Taxes and Bureaucracy,
Entrepreneurial Education at School and Researchand Development Transfers. No surprise thatgovernment plays a large part in each of these, as it
does in Government Policy: Support and Relevanceand in Government Entrepreneurial Programs, bothof which fared little better. However, Guatemalascored relatively highly for Entrepreneurial Education
Post-School, giving it its highest rank among the
51 GEM economies (15th). On the other hand, five
Framework Conditions were ranked in the bottom
five of those 51 economies in 2022: Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance, Government Policy:
Support and Relevance, Government Entrepreneurial
Programs, Research and Development Transfersand Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics. There isclearly much to do to support entrepreneurship in
Guatemala.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
There is little doubt that the pandemic hit Guatemala
hard. Almost two in three adults in 2022 reported thatthe pandemic had reduced their household income,a proportion that was only slightly lower than in 2020.
Despite this, the share of Guatemalan adults investingin someone else’s new business has remained
relatively high (and stable), falling just a little from 16%
in 2019 to 14% in 2022. Awareness of entrepreneurshipin Guatemala remains high, as is confidence in one’s
own abilities, with around seven out of 10 adults
knowing someone who has recently started a business,or agreeing that they have the skills and experience todo so themselves, or seeing good opportunities to starta business locally.
The percentage of adults intending to start abusiness in the next three years has also remained
relatively high, although falling a little, from 52% in 2019
to 47% in 2022.
The percentage of adults starting or running a new
business in Guatemala has actually increased overthe pandemic cycle, from 25% in 2019 to 29% in 2022,
although the level of EBO has gone the other way,from 15% in 2019 to 12% in 2022. There were more than
two adults starting a new business for every adultrunning an established business in 2022, with men
slightly more likely than women to be running those
new businesses.
New entrepreneurs in Guatemala see noinconsistency in agreeing with multiple motivations,with nine out of 10 agreeing with the motivation “toearn a living because jobs are scarce”, eight out of 10
agreeing with “to make a difference in the world” orwith “building great wealth or very high income”.
Just one in 10 new entrepreneurs had customers
outside of their country, although this was afourfold increase from 2021. More than seven in
10 of those starting or running new business inGuatemala expected, in the next six months, to use
more digital technology to sell their products. Job
expectations were also fairly high, with three in 10 new
entrepreneurs expecting to employ an additional six
people or more in five years’ time, up from two in 10
pre-pandemic (2019).

Institution

Team

Funders

Contact

Lead institution

Team leader
Mónica Río-Nevado de Zelaya, PhD

Francisco Marroquín University— UFM

zelaya@ufm.edu

Kirzner Entrepreneurship Center at
Francisco Marroquín University

Team members
Carolina Uribe
Jershem David Casasola

APS vendor

curibe@ufm.edu
jdcasasola@ufm.edu
nponce@ufm.edu

Khanti Consulting, SA

Natalia Ponce
Type of institution
University
Websitewww.kec.ufm.edu
www.gem.ufm.edu

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report141

ECONOMY PROFILE

Hungary
Q Population (2021): 9.7 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 36.8 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

47.9

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

27.2

46

It is easy to start a business

47.4

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

31

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

66.9

10

To build great wealth or very high income

37.0

48

27

To continue a family tradition

21.6

40

36.8

46

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

57.9

35

Fear of failure (opportunity)

34.0

43

Entrepreneurial intentions*

8.7

38

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.7

30=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

11.1

24

Always consider social impact

66.6

42

Always consider environmental impact

80.3

21

Industry (% TEA in business services)

26.6

19

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

9.9

28

7.9

12.0

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

6.9

21

4.6

9.4

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

29.1

38=

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

42.9

24

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

37.7

39

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

17.4

48

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.1 (10/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.3 (2/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.8 (2/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.6 (5/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Hungary
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.3 (5/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.7 (6/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.5 (3/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.5 (13/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.9 (6/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.7 (5/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.4 (4/16)

142

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.2 (14/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.4 (10/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPBy Q3 2022, Hungary’s GDP was 4% higher than ayear earlier, unemployment was just below 4%, but
consumer prices had risen to more than 22%. Theserising prices were squeezing margins and reducing
consumption. Over the course of 2022, the government
had reduced taxes on labour, introduced some support
for the overhead costs of small and medium-sizedenterprises, and issued a moratorium on payments ofprincipal, interest and charges for companies.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
National expert assessments point to some
improvement in Hungarian Framework Conditionsin 2022, with scores rising for nine conditions anddeclining for four. The biggest improvements were inboth ease of entry conditions, and in Entrepreneurial
Finance, pushing the score for the latter into
sufficiency (≥5.0). This is a good achievement for an
economy that appears to be recovering strongly
from the effects of the pandemic, reflected in the 6.5score for COVID recovery, placing it ninth out of 51
economies. The largest fall in a Framework Condition
score was for Entrepreneurial Education at School,
reducing an already low score still further.
The net result of these changes is that, in theyear to 2022, Hungary’s overall score (its National
Entrepreneurial Context Index or NECI) improved
from 4.5 to 4.7, lifting Hungary up the NECI league
table from 27th to 24th. Hungary’s scores were better
than the Level B average for nine conditions, although
Social and Cultural Norms need to improve if Hungary
is to achieve its entrepreneurial ambitions. This scoredeclined further in 2022, leaving Hungary ranked 37th
for this Framework Condition. Changing those norms
must be a long-term goal.

Institution

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
In recent years (2021 and 2022), Hungary has been
participating in GEM, providing some limited
opportunities for comparison. In 2022, just under one
in 10 adults intended to start a business in the next
three years, up slightly on the previous year. Almost
half of adults knew someone who had recently started
a business, although less than two in five consideredthemselves to have the skills and experience to do thesame. Only one in four adults in Hungary saw good
opportunities to start a business locally, down from
more than one in three a year before, a decline that
may be related to events in neighbouring Ukraine.
More than a third of those who saw good opportunities
would be deterred by fear of failure.
One in 10 Hungarian adults was starting or runninga new business in 2022, up slightly from the year
before, although a majority of these were male, withthree men starting a new business for every two
women doing the same. The level of EBO in 2022 was
7%, down from 8% a year earlier
If change brings opportunities, it also threatens theestablished order. Despite difficult circumstances, and
28% of Hungarian adults reporting a loss of householdincome due to the pandemic, “to make a differencein the world” was the dominant agreed motivation for
new entrepreneurs in 2022, whereas the motivation “toearn a living because jobs are scarce” had dominated ayear earlier.
Perhaps one consequence of regional turbulence
has been to encourage Hungarian entrepreneurs toseek customers elsewhere. The proportion of new
entrepreneurs with customers outside of the country
increased from 16% in 2021 to 28% in 2022, and theambitions of those entrepreneurs have also grown. In
2021 just 12% of new entrepreneurs were expecting toemploy an additional six or more people in the next
five years. By 2022 this percentage had increased to 18.

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leaderTÁRKI Social Research InstituteBudapest Business School —University of Applied Sciences (BBS)

Judit Csákné Filep

Budapest Business School —University of Applied Sciences (BBS)BUDAPESTI BUSINESS SCHOOLUNIVERSITY OF APPLIED SCIENCESTeam members

Contact

Judit Csákné Filepcsaknefilep.judit@uni-bge.hu

László RadácsiÁron Szennay

Type of institution

Zsófia Borsodi

University

Gigi Timár

Websitehttps://uni-bge.hu/en

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report143ECONOMY PROFILEIndia
Q Population (2021): 1,393 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 7.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

47.4

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

75.5

7

It is easy to start a business

78.0

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

34

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

80.9

2=

To build great wealth or very high income

69.0

16

6

To continue a family tradition

68.6

1

78.1

5

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

78.0

16

Fear of failure (opportunity)

54.0

5

Entrepreneurial intentions*

20.1

20

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.7

30=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

2.1

42=

Always consider social impact

84.7

16

Always consider environmental impact

74.2

31

Industry (% TEA in business services)

4.8

46

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

11.5

24

11.4

11.6

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

9.0

12=

7.6

10.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

73.9

5

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

68.0

3

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

28.2

48

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

68.8

1

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
6.3 (3/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
6.0 (2/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.7 (1/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.7 (3/13)

9
8
7
6
5

India
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
6.6 (1/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
6.0 (1/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.2 (2/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.0 (4/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.3 (1/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.9 (1/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
5.7 (1/13)

144

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
5.7 (1/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.6 (3/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe Indian economy was expected to grow bynearly 7% in 2022, with inflation falling from to 6% in
November 2022.
In 2022 the Prime Minister launched a number of
initiatives to support small businesses, including the“Raising and Accelerating MSME Performance” (RAMP)
project and the “Capacity Building of First-time MSME
Exporters”.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Comparing across years, a smooth upwards
progression is apparent in the overall entrepreneurial
environment rated by national experts and measured
by the National Entrepreneurship Context Index(NECI). India went from a score of 5.8 in 2019, ranked
sixth among GEM economies, to a score of 6.0 in
2020, ranked fourth, and then to a score of 6.1 in 2022,
also ranked fourth. However, in 2021, India’s NECI wasscored at 5.0, only just sufficient, and ranked 16th.
One explanation may be that the pandemic
was a severe, but temporary, shock to theIndian entrepreneurial environment, with all 13
Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions scoring lower
in 2021 than in 2020. In 2020, all of India’s Framework
Conditions were scored as better than sufficient(≥5.0). In 2021, seven of those conditions were rated as
insufficient, but by 2022 all had returned to sufficiency.
These changes, many of which were considerable,both in the fall from 2020 to 2021 and in the recovery
2021 to 2022, suggest a high-quality entrepreneurial
environment but one that is very fragile and far fromresilient.
So, in a sense, normal service has resumed in 2022,with the entrepreneurial environment restored to highquality, with, for example, all but three Framework
Conditions ranked in the top 10 of the 51 GEM National
Expert Survey (NES) economies. The exceptions wereEntrepreneurial Education Post-School, Commercial
and Professional Infrastructure and PhysicalInfrastructure. None of these ranked outside of the top
20. But there are lessons to learn from the sudden dip in
2021, not least that India’s high-quality entrepreneurial
environment cannot be taken for granted.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Almost three in four adults in India reported thatthe pandemic had reduced their household income
in 2022, the fifth highest proportion of the 51 GEM
economies, behind Togo, Venezuela, Indonesia and
Mexico. Even this high proportion in India in 2022 waslower than it had been the previous two years. So thereis clear evidence that India has been harshly affectedby the pandemic.
One impact may be that the proportion of Indian
adults expecting to start their own business in thenext three years fell from more than a third in 2019to just a fifth in 2022. Confidence in one’s own ability
to start a business, although still relatively high, hadalso fallen, from 85% of adults agreeing they have theskills and experience to start a business in 2019 to 78%
in 2022. The proportion of adults who saw good local
opportunities to start a business stayed high, at fourout of five, throughout 2019–2021, but fell slightly tothree in four in 2022.
These have been turbulent years for the Indian
economy, and the proportion of adults starting or
running their own business has fluctuated, falling
sharply from 15% in 2019 to just 5.3% in 2020, then rising
to 8.5% in 2021 and 9% in 2022. Meanwhile, the level of
EBO followed a similar pattern, halving from 11.9% to5.9% in 2020, then rising to 8.5% in 2021 and 9% in 2022.
So in the depths of the pandemic in 2020, fewer adults
in India were starting new businesses than runningestablished ones.
In 2022, “to make a difference in the world” had
the highest level of agreement among new Indian
entrepreneurs, closely followed by “to earn a living
because jobs are scarce”. However, the proportion of
new entrepreneurs expecting, in the next six months,
to use more digital technologies to sell their products
halved in the year to 2022, from six in 10 to three in
10. This is concerning if the pace of recovery is to be
maintained. Just one in seven of those starting or
running a new business in India in 2022 expected to
employ another six people or more in the next five
years.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
Dr. Sunil Shukla, PhD

Centre for Research in
Entrepreneurship Education andDevelopment (CREED)

Kantar IMRB

Entrepreneurship Development
Institute of India (EDII) — Ahmedabad

Team members

Contact

Dr. Amit Kumar Dwivedi, PhD

akdwivedi@ediindia.org

Dr. Pankaj Bharti, PhD
Type of institution
Research InstituteWebsitehttps://www.ediindia.org

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report145

ECONOMY PROFILE

Indonesia
Q Population (2021): 276.4 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 12.9 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

71.4

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

87.2

2

It is easy to start a business

72.2

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)% TEA

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

48.5

23

To build great wealth or very high income

81.6

5

8

To continue a family tradition

31.0

21

75.5

8

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

80.6

14

Fear of failure (opportunity)

36.8

41

Entrepreneurial intentions*

33.3

12

5

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.3

36=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

3.3

42=

Always consider social impact

88.6

8

Always consider environmental impact

84.2

15

Industry (% TEA in business services)

2.3

49

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

8.1

36

9.2

7.0

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

5.7

29=

5.9

5.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

75.2

4

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

34.8

34

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

60.9

13

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

46.7

23

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
6.4 (1/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
6.0 (1/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.1 (3/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.8 (2/13)

9
8
7
6
5

Indonesia
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
6.2 (3/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
5.7 (2/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.1 (3/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.0 (2/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.2 (3/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.4 (2/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.5 (3/13)

146

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
4.7 (2/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
6.2 (1/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn the aftermath of the pandemic, the Indonesian
economy experienced strong GDP growth in 2022,
reaching 6% in Q3 2022, but inflation was also
on the rise driven by increasing commodity andenergy prices. Entrepreneurs were still enjoying
growth conditions in key sectors including food andbeverages, and fashion.
In 2022, Indonesia issued Presidential Regulation
Number 2 on National Entrepreneurship Development,
stipulating facilities, incentives and recovery measuresfor entrepreneurs.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Indonesia last participated in GEM in 2020, giving
limited scope for comparisons. In that year, Indonesia
had a quality of entrepreneurial environmentthat ranked first among the 45 economies thenparticipating in the GEM National Expert Survey(NES), with a National Entrepreneurship Context
Index (NECI) score of 6.4, and with all Entrepreneurial
Framework Conditions rated as sufficient (≥5.0), mostby a wide margin. By 2022, Indonesia’s position hadchanged markedly. Nine framework conditions saw
their scores fall, some considerably, to the extent that
two were now rated as insufficient. It would be easy
to attribute these changes to the pandemic, but in
new NES questions Indonesia’s national experts rated
the recovery from the economic impacts of COVID-19
as well sufficient, with a score of 6.4 (11th of the 51
economies).
Delving a little deeper, Indonesia’s Framework
Condition scores had fallen most for Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School, for Government
Entrepreneurial Programs and for Research andDevelopment Transfers. These are Framework
Conditions in which the government has substantial
influence. So the deterioration may say more
about political priorities than about the effects ofthe pandemic. However, Indonesia still had eight
Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions ranked in
the top 10 of these GEM economies, and just one,
Commercial and Professional Infrastructure, ranked in
the bottom half.

Institution
Lead institution
UNPAR (Parahyangan Catholic
University)

Websitehttps://unpar.ac.id/Team2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
There is no doubt that the pandemic has had
widespread impact on Indonesia, with almost threeout of four adults reporting the pandemic has reduced
their household income, among the highest in GEM
economies. Perhaps because of this, or because of
reduced access to entrepreneurial finance elsewhere,
the share of Indonesian adults investing in someone
else’s new business has more than doubled since 2020,
from 6% to 14%. The proportion intending to start a
new business in the next three years rose from 28%
to 33%. Confidence was high, with three-quarters ofIndonesian adults agreeing they had the skills andexperience to start a new business, with only slightly
fewer knowing someone who had recently done so.
Almost nine out of 10 saw good opportunities to starta business locally, and just a third of those would be
prevented from doing so by the fear of failure.
Despite these encouraging signs, the percentageof adults in Indonesia starting and running a new
business fell from 9.6% to 8.1% between 2020 and 2022,with the male percentage falling faster than that for
women. The entrepreneurial gender gap has widened:by 2022, there were nine women starting and runninga new business for every seven men doing the same.
Still struggling with the pandemic recovery, thepercentage of adults running an established businesshalved over this period (from 11.4% to 5.7%). In 2020,
just over 4% of Indonesian adults had exited a businessin the past 12 months. By 2022, this had risen to 11%,
meaning business exits exceeded new starts. These
declines point to a hollowing-out of Indonesianbusinesses, reflecting very poor trading conditions andfairly bleak employment prospects.
Not surprisingly, the material motivations (“to build
great wealth or very high income” or “to earn a living
because jobs are scarce”) had the highest levels ofagreement among new entrepreneurs, althoughalmost a half agreed with the motive “to make adifference in the world”.
Not many new entrepreneurs had customers
beyond Indonesia (less than 5%), although three in fiveexpected to use more digital technology in the next
six months to sell their products. More optimistically,
the percentage of those starting or running a new
business who expected to employ another six or more
people in the next five years has risen sharply, from just
3% in 2020 to 16% in 2022.

Funders

APS vendor

UNPAR (Parahyangan Catholic
University)

Sapat Institut

Team leader
Gandhi Pawitan
Team members

Contact
gandhip08@gmail.com
katrin@unpar.ac.id

Catharina Badra NawangpalupiType of institution
University

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report147

ECONOMY PROFILEIran
Q Population (2021): 85.0 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 15.8 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

64.1

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

51.3

31

It is easy to start a business

23.7

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)% TEA

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

34.9

36

To build great wealth or very high income

85.1

2

47

To continue a family tradition

22.8

36

54.2

29

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

69.9

22

Fear of failure (opportunity)

30.9

48

Entrepreneurial intentions*

27.5

16

11

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

5.5

10

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

3.2

42

Always consider social impact

71.3

33

Always consider environmental impact

68.8

38=

Industry (% TEA in business services)

17.5

28

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

16.4

14

13.6

19.3

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

10.8

6

3.9

17.6

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

49.8

23

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

62.3

6

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

53.4

23

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

21.6

43

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.4 (10/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.6 (7/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.5 (7/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.5 (8/13)

9
8
7
6
5

Iran
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance3.3 (10/13)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.1 (13/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.2 (11/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.7 (9/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.1 (11/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.2 (10/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.7 (9/13)

148

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.0 (10/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
3.0 (13/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe Iranian economy is dominated by its oil and gas,
agricultural and services sectors, with both economic
activity and government revenues closely tied to theglobal price of oil. In 2022, inflation was expected to
top 40%, with unemployment at just under 10% andfalling slowly. The costs of starting a business (rent, rawmaterials, etc.) were all increasing, while rising prices
had increased uncertainty over demand. Many people
have responded to economic conditions by taking on asecond job, or by starting their own small business.
In 2022, the government introduced more
entrepreneurial support, including improvements infacilitating the issue of business licences, and support
for knowledge-based businesses through long-termloans at preferential rates.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Starting and running a business in Iran cannot beeasy. For the second year running, the quality of theoverall entrepreneurial environment in Iran has beenranked as the second lowest. In the previous year, Iran’s
National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score
was just above Sudan; in 2022 just above Venezuela.
Yet Iran’s score improved in 2022 to 3.6, having been
3.3 a year earlier. This is because Iran’s scores had risenfor 10 of the 13 Framework Conditions, demonstratingthat considerable efforts were being made to improvethose entrepreneurial conditions.
However, despite these improvements, many of
those Framework Condition scores were a long way
from sufficiency (≥5.0), with nine still below 4.0. Thereis room for more improvement across the board, but
especially in entrepreneurial finance, in business policy
and programmes and in entrepreneurial education at
all levels, although these areas have already improved
since 2021. Only one Framework Condition was rated as
sufficient in 2022, Physical Infrastructure, while Iran’shighest-ranked condition was for Social and Cultural
Norms, ranked 30th of 51 GEM economies.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Almost half of Iranian adults reported that the
pandemic had reduced their household income in2022. Perhaps because of this, or because of the lackof entrepreneurial finance options elsewhere, while

Institution
Lead institution
Faculty of Entrepreneurship,
University of Tehran

the percentage of adults investing in someone else’s
new business had fallen at the start of the pandemic,
it had since increased strongly, with the level in 2022
(9%) more than double that of 2020 (4%). The intention
to start a business also declined with the onset of thepandemic (from 42% in 2019 to 25% a year later) but
only partially recovered since (to 28% in 2021 and thenthe same in 2022).
The percentage of adults in Iran starting or runninga new business has followed a familiar pandemic cycle
pattern, declining in the early days (10.7% in 2019 to 8%
in 2020), before recovering slightly in 2021 (8.8%) andthen leaping in 2022 (to 16.4%). So, in just two years,
the level of new entrepreneurial activity had doubled,
although men remained about a half more likely
than women to be starting a new business. EBO has
followed a more modest path, rising in the early daysof the pandemic before falling back. By 2022, the rateof EBO in Iran, at 10.8% of adults, was little different towhat it had been in 2019 (10.2%). So, in 2019, the levelof new entrepreneurship more or less matched thelevel of EBO. By 2022, there were three adults startingor running a new business for every two Established
Business Owners.
On a range of entrepreneurial social parameters,
Iran scores well. Almost two-thirds of adults knew
someone who had recently started a business,while more than half considered themselves to havethe skills and experience to do the same. A similar
proportion saw good opportunities to start a businesslocally, and less than a third of these would have been
deterred by fear of failure.
“To building great wealth or very high income”
was by far the most commonly agreed motivation for
those starting a new business, agreed by 85% in 2022,
followed by “to earn a living because jobs are scarce”.
Only a third of new entrepreneurs agreed with the
motivation “to make a difference in the world”, andless than a quarter with the motivation “to continue afamily tradition”.
The share of new entrepreneurs with customers
outside the country fell in the early days of thepandemic, but had recovered strongly to almost afifth in 2022. More than a half of new entrepreneurs
expected to use more digital technology in the next
six months to sell their products, while a third of those
new entrepreneurs expected to employ another six ormore people in five years’ time.

Type of institution

Team members

University

Prof. Nezameddin Faghih

Websitehttp://ent.ut.ac.ir/en

Prof. Ali Rezaeian
Dr. Mohammad Reza Zali
Dr. Jahangir Yadollahi Farsi

Team

Dr. Seyed Mostafa Razavi

Team leader

Leyla Sarfaraz

Dr. Rahim Sarhangi

Prof. Faghih

Funders
Iran Labour and Social Security
Institute (LSSI)APS vendor
Faculty of Entrepreneurship

Contact
mrzali@ut.ac.ir

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report149ECONOMY PROFILE

IsraelQ Population (2021): 9.4 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 43.7 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

59.2

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

46.8

35=

It is easy to start a business

12.9

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

17

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

33.4

37

To build great wealth or very high income

77.7

10

49

To continue a family tradition

16.5

45

35.4

48

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

50.9

38

Fear of failure (opportunity)

44.0

26

Entrepreneurial intentions*

12.3

35

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.7

30=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

19.5

12

Always consider social impact

55.2

47

Always consider environmental impact

47.6

49

Industry (% TEA in business services)

42.7

1

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

8.7

32

7.0

10.5

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

3.5

41

3.6

3.3

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

36.3

30

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

38.5

31

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

48.5

27

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

49.9

20

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
2.5 (22/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.9 (15/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.2 (7/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
3.6 (22/22)

9
8
7
6
5

IsraelLevel A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
6.3 (3/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
6.9 (1/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.6 (2/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.5 (16/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.5 (4/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.8 (22/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
6.6 (2/22)

150

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
7.6 (1/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
6.0 (3/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
Israel’s economy continued to grow at about 7%
between 2021 and 2022 but is expected to slow
down slightly in 2023. Private spending, which
accounts for more than half of economic activity in
Israel, declined in Q3 2022 by 2%, after a 9% gain theprior three months. Rising prices have had limited
impact on entrepreneurship, because new digitally
based ventures have been able to compensate forincreases in the cost of living. In 2022, the government
introduced new policy changes to support
entrepreneurship, particularly for minorities.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The evolution of Israel’s quality of entrepreneurial
environment is both complex and contradictory. In 2019,
Israel had an entrepreneurial environment assessed
as well sufficient, with an National Entrepreneurship
Context Index (NECI) score of 5.3, placing it 11th among
GEM economies. At the onset of the pandemic, thatassessment fell to 4.8, less than sufficient and 22ndamong GEM economies. In 2021, Israel’s NECI scoreincreased to 4.9, with a ranking of 18th, and in 2022
increased to a well-sufficient 5.5 and a rank of 12th outof 51 GEM economies. So, on the surface, there was a fallat the start of the pandemic and a good recovery since.
But delve a little deeper and contradictions begin
to appear. Start with the assessment of Israel’s
recovery from the pandemic. This score came in at
a much less than sufficient 4.0, third lowest of the
51 GEM economies in 2022. Then consider individual
framework scores in 2022 compared to 2021. In 2021,
Israel had nine conditions scored as insufficient (<5.0)
and four as sufficient. By 2022 this had become fiveinsufficient and eight sufficient. But this wasn’t simply
an improvement in four conditions: between 2021 and
2022, 12 of Israel’s 13 framework conditions changed
status: eight from insufficient to sufficient, and four
from sufficient to insufficient.
Many of these changes were very dramatic. If ascore of 4.0 is poor, and 6.0 is good, in the space ofa year four conditions went from poor to good: bothgovernment policy conditions, plus Entrepreneurial
Education at School and Ease of Entry: Burdens andRegulation. At the same time two scores went fromgood to poor: Physical Infrastructure ,and Social andCultural Norms. Of the 51 GEM economies in 2022,
Israel was ranked first for Entrepreneurial Education at
Institution
Lead institution
Ira Center of Business, Technology &Society, Ben Gurion Universit of the
Negev

The percentage of adults reporting that the pandemic
had reduced their household income in 2022 fell to36%, having been 43% a year earlier. Meanwhile, thepercentage of adults intending to start a businessin the next three years had fallen throughout the
pandemic period, and in 2022 was 12%, less than half of
its level in 2019 (30%).
Most Israelis are familiar with the notion ofentrepreneurship, although the proportion knowing
someone who had recently started a business has
fallen slightly. More than a third of adults consideredthemselves to have the skills and experience to be able
to start their own business, and the proportion seeing
good local opportunities to do so, having fallen at theonset of the pandemic (from 46% in 2019 to 25% in2020), bounced back to pre-pandemic levels in 2022.
Meanwhile, the percentage of adults actually
starting a new business has drifted downwards since2019 when it was 12.7%, reaching 8.7% in 2022. Maleand female entrepreneurship have moved in parallel:in 2022 there were three men starting a new businessfor every two women doing the same, just as there wasin 2019. Over the same period, the level of EBO has also
drifted downwards, but from an already low base. In
2019 5.5% of Israeli adults were running an establishedbusiness — by 2022 this had fallen to 3.5%. So while
the level of new entrepreneurship in Israel looks
reasonable, few of these new businesses are sustained
into established ones.
To build great wealth or very high income was
the most agreed motivation among Israel’s new
entrepreneurs, agreed by at least seven in 10 since
this question was introduced by GEM. Three in 10 new
entrepreneurs had customers beyond Israel in 2022,
down from four in 10 a year earlier. Around half of thoseentrepreneurs expected, in the next six months, to use
more digital technology to sell their products, and one
in five expected to employ another six or more people
in the next three years.
Prof. Eli Gimmon, PhD

https://in.bgu.ac.il/en

Michal Ben David, MSc

Other institutions involved
Ministry of Economics and Industry,
Government of Israel

Funders

APS vendor
Brandman InstituteContact

The Ira Foundation for BusinessTechnology and Society

ehudm@bgu.ac.il

Ben Gurion University of the Negev

yoasav@zahav.net.il

M51 Corporation

eligim@telhai.ac.il

Prof. Emeritus Ehud Menipaz, PhD

The Ministry of the Economy andIndustry

michbe@openu.ac.il

Team members

Government of Israel

Team leader

University

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review

WebsiteTeam

Type of institution

School and for Ease of Entry: Burdens and Regulation,and last for Physical Infrastructure and for Social andCultural Norms. Just a year earlier, Israel had ranked
first among 50 GEM economies for Social and Cultural
Norms and lowest among 19 Level A economies forEase of Entry: Burdens and Regulation.

Yoash Avrahami, MSc

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report151ECONOMY PROFILE

Italy
Q Population (2021): 59.1 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 45.9 thousand (World Bank)

Italy did not participate in the2022 Adult Population Survey.

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.4 (15/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.3 (20/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.9 (21/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.1 (21/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Italy
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.2 (18/22)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.9 (22/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.6 (21/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.9 (14/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.1 (20/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.0 (21/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.9 (20/22)

152

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.8 (16/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.3 (20/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPGDP growth in Italy in 2022 was expected to bearound 3%, with inflation at 8%. Unemployment wasback below pre-pandemic levels, but still relatively
high at 8%. Rising prices and uncertainty over themacroeconomic environment were both adversely
affecting entrepreneurial activities.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Italy was among the countries hit hardest and earliest
by the pandemic. National expert assessments rated
Italy’s COVID recovery at 5.7: more than sufficient,but middle ranking among the 51 GEM participating
economies in 2022.
This score for COVID recovery turns out to be higher
than any Entrepreneurial Framework Condition that
Italy achieved in 2022. Those scores deteriorated
sharply in 2022, pushing Italy’s overall National
Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI) score down to 4.2
from 4.7, placing Italy 37th when it had been 24th justa year earlier. This deterioration was not quite on thescale of Italy’s Mediterranean near-neighbour Spain,

but serious enough at a time when most economies
were investing to improve their environment forentrepreneurship.
All but one Framework Condition in Italy scoredlower in 2022 than in 2021, with the largest falls
for Research and Development Transfers, PhysicalInfrastructure, Ease of Entry: Burdens and Regulation
and Government Policy: Support and Relevance. Only
two Framework Conditions were rated as sufficient(≥5.0) in 2022, and both by a fine margin. Much of the
responsibility for these worsening conditions rests withthe government, who must therefore take ownershipfor restoring that entrepreneurial environment. A goodplace to start would be entrepreneurial education,in both schools and colleges, although attention isneeded for most conditions across the board.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Italy did not participate in the 2022 GEM Adult
Population Survey.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Fondazione Aristide Merloni

IPSOS

Centre for Innovation and
Entrepreneurship, Università
Politecnica delle Marche

Prof. Donato Iacobucci, PhD

Università Politecnica delle Marche

Team members

Contact

Associate Prof. Diego D’Adda, PhD

d.iacobucci@staff.univpm.it

Associate Prof. Alessandra Micozzi,
PhD
Francesca Micozzi, PhD
Type of institution

Martina Orci

University
Websitehttps://www.univpm.it

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report153ECONOMY PROFILEJapan
Q Population (2021): 125.7 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 42.9 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

20.4

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

12.7

49

It is easy to start a business

27.5

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

49

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

31.9

39

To build great wealth or very high income

41.1

43

44

To continue a family tradition

26.5

30

14.9

49

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

37.1

45

Fear of failure (opportunity)

50.9

10=

Entrepreneurial intentions*

5.1

48

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.1

43=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

6.7

31

Always consider social impact

64.6

43

Always consider environmental impact

55.6

45=

Industry (% TEA in business services)

41.7

2

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

6.4

43

3.6

9.1

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

6.3

26

4.1

8.6

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

25.8

43

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

26.8

43

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

54.4

22

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

28.2

42

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.8 (20/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.5 (18/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.8 (12/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.4 (7/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Japan
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
5.6 (6/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.9 (11/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.5 (19/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.1 (4/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.6 (18/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.1 (20/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.9 (7/22)

154

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.5 (20/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.0 (13/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
Slow but stable and balanced growth was expected
in Japan in 2022. Inflation was also low, at around 2%,
with little impact on entrepreneurship.
The Japanese government is planning a systemthat would require private financial institutions not
to demand collateral or guarantors when they extend
loans to newly established companies.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The overall quality of the Japanese environment forentrepreneurship was assessed by its own national
experts as just sufficient in 2022, with a National
Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI) score of 5.0,
ranking it 22nd among 51 GEM economies. A year
earlier it had been scored at 4.7, less than sufficient(<5.0), but ranked at 21st. So that overall environment
had improved, with 10 of 13 individual Framework
Conditions scoring higher in 2022 than 2021. These
improvements had been enough to push three
conditions from insufficient to sufficient: Government
Policy: Support and Relevance; Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School; and Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure. In 2022, Japan had fiveconditions rated as sufficient compared to just two ayear earlier.
However, despite these improvements, it may
be surprising that modern, high-income Japan still
has so many Framework Conditions scored so low.
While Japan ranked sixth of 51 economies for Easeof Entry: Market Dynamics, and eighth for PhysicalInfrastructure, it was also 45th in terms of Social andCultural Norms. It is also surprising that Japan is still
rated as insufficient in both entrepreneurial financeconditions and in Government Entrepreneurial
Programs. This uneven Framework Condition
performance may help to explain why so few adults
start new businesses.
Institution
Lead institution
Musashi University

Websitehttps://www.musashi.ac.jp/english
Other institutions involved
Nihon University
Chuo University
Toyo University
Keio University

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Japan has certainly not escaped the impacts of
COVID-19, with one in four adults reporting that theirhousehold income was lower in 2022 due to thepandemic, down a little on a year earlier. Very few
Japanese invest in a new business started by someone
else, and not many more intend to start a business inthe next few years, although that proportion has beenslowly rising.
The percentage of adults starting or running a new
business in Japan remains relatively low, even for ahigh-income economy, but has been fairly stable since
the onset of the pandemic, slowly climbing to 6.4% in
2022. EBO has been less stable, rising then falling as
the pandemic took hold, then rising again to match
TEA in 2022. Throughout the period, men have beenaround twice as likely as women to be starting a new
business.
Not surprisingly, low levels of entrepreneurial activity
mean that just one in five Japanese adults know
someone who has started a business. An even smaller
share consider themselves to have the skills andexperience to start their own, or see good conditions tostart a business locally. For those that do, half would bedeterred from doing so by fear of failure.
Agreement by new entrepreneurs is fairly evenly
divided among the four defined motivations, but “tobuild great wealth or very high income” just about
leads with two out of five. More than a half of new
entrepreneurs expect to use more digital technology
in the next six months to sell their products, and justabout one in five expect to employ an additional six
people in five years’ time. Finally, the share of new
entrepreneurs with customers beyond Japan has been
increasing slowly, from less than one in five in 2019 toalmost one in four in 2022.

Team

Funders

Team leader

Ministry of Economy, Trade andIndustry, METI

President Noriyuki Takahashi
Team members
Prof. Masaaki Suzuki
Prof. Yuji Honjo
Prof. Takehiko YasudaProf. Takeo Isobe

Type of institution
University

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

APS vendor
Social Survey Research Information
Co. Ltd (SSRI)

Contact
noriyuki@cc.musashi.ac.jp155ECONOMY PROFILE

LatviaQ Population (2021): 1.9 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 34.5 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

38.0

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

34.6

It is easy to start a business(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

42

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

29.3

41

44

To build great wealth or very high income

40.4

44

29.4

43

To continue a family tradition

22.6

37=

Personally have the skills and knowledge

53.9

30

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

63.9

28

Fear of failure (opportunity)

36.7

42

Entrepreneurial intentions*

17.6

23

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

3.5

16

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

25.2

3

Always consider social impact

70.7

35

Always consider environmental impact

76.0

27

Industry (% TEA in business services)

28.5

16

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

14.2

16

10.6

17.8

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

12.3

4

8.4

16.3

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

28.4

40

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

46.3

21

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

45.6

34

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

35.0

34

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.8 (2/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.1 (3/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.6 (4/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.3 (8/16)

9
8
7
6
5

LatviaLevel B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.7 (2/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
5.5 (1/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.9 (6/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.1 (1/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.5 (3/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.6 (2/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
5.0 (2/16)

156

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
5.6 (1/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.2 (4/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
According to the Bank of Latvia, GDP growth will slow
to 3% in 2022 with an unemployment rate around 7%
and with an annual inflation rate close to a record highrate of 22%.
Business confidence has dropped sharply andbusiness investment continues to slow due to highuncertainty and worsening financial conditions.
Many companies had passed on increased costs of
their goods and services, but this cannot be applied
indefinitely as the reduction in purchasing power
would lead to a reduction in demand.
The Latvian government has approved the Recovery
Fund support program, launched in August 2022 andaiming to increase productivity growth and reduceenergy costs.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The assessed quality of the overall entrepreneurial
environment in Latvia, as measured by its National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score, has
improved considerably in recent years, despite thepandemic. In 2020, Latvia’s overall score was 4.2,
much less than sufficient (<5.0), and ranked 21stamong GEM economies. In 2020 that score edged
into just sufficient, at 5.0, ranked 17th. In 2022, Latvia’sscore increased even more to 5.5, well sufficient, andranked 13th among the 51 GEM economies. These
improvements were surely influenced by the positive
response to the economic effects of the pandemic withnational experts scoring Latvia at 6.1 (well sufficient) on
this new question.
Moreover, these improvements were largely
across the board, with improvements in 12 of the
13 Framework Condition scores in 2022, and only
one score falling: Physical Infrastructure. There areclear signs that the government has played a largepart in these improvements, with both government
policy conditions assessed as improved, although still
not sufficient. However, both education conditions
improved enough to push them into sufficiency. The
improvement in Entrepreneurial Education at School
was both substantial and rare: Latvia was fourth on thiscondition among GEM economies in 2022. Both easeof entry conditions also improved, suggesting markets
Institution
Lead institution
Stockholm School of Economics in
Riga (SSE Riga)

Type of institution
Business School
Websitehttps://www.sseriga.edu
Other institutions involved
Baltic International Centre for
Economic Policy Studies (BICEPS)

were working hand in hand with the government toenhance the entrepreneurial environment in Latvia.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The proportion of adults reporting that the pandemic
had reduced their household income in 2022 was justover a quarter, still high but an improvement on the
one in three reporting decreased incomes two years
earlier. Over the same period, the percentage of adults
investing in someone else’s business had been stable
but low, at around 6% in 2022. However, businessintentions were lower in 2022 (18%) than before thepandemic (28% in 2019).
There has been similar stability in the key
entrepreneurial activity variables. In 2019, 15.4% of
adults in Latvia were starting or running a new
business. By 2022, this was down slightly at 14.2%.
EBO fared similarly: from 12.9% to 12.3% over thesame period. Even the entrepreneurial gender gap
has remained stable, with around five men startingor running a new business in Latvia for every three
women doing the same.
The proportion of adults in Latvia knowing someone
who had recently started their own business declined
a little at the onset of the pandemic, and has stayed
down since, at about two in five in 2022, having been
almost one in two in 2019. Confidence has remained
high, with more than a half of Latvian adults agreeing
they have the skills and experience to start their own
business in each of the last four years. The proportionof adults seeing good opportunities to start a businesslocally fell over the pandemic, but not by much, andwas more than one in three in 2022. Just one-third ofthese would be deterred from starting a business by
the fear of failure.
“To earn a living because jobs are scarce” hasremained the most agreed motivation among Latvia’s
new entrepreneurs, of whom nearly half expect touse more digital technology in the next six months tosell their products. Meanwhile, the proportion of new
entrepreneurs with strong job expectations (expecting
to employ another six or more people in five years’time) was high, at around one in four, but lower thanthe one in three pre-pandemic (in 2019).
Team

APS vendor

Team leader

SKDS

Marija Krumina, MSc, PhD candidate
Team members

Contact

Anders Paalzow, PhD

marija@biceps.org

Funders
Stockholm School of Economics in
Riga

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report157

ECONOMY PROFILE

Lithuania
Q Population (2021): 2.8 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 42.7 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

53.1

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

40.4

40

It is easy to start a business

36.5

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

26

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

40.8

31=

To build great wealth or very high income

46.5

37

36=

To continue a family tradition

24.0

33=

49.8

36=

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

66.6

25

Fear of failure (opportunity)

46.2

19

Entrepreneurial intentions*

15.1

29

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

3.2

18

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

18.5

15

Always consider social impact

71.4

31=

Always consider environmental impact

76.3

25=

Industry (% TEA in business services)

20.0

24

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

12.7

20

9.0

16.6

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

8.3

15=

5.7

10.9

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

29.1

38=

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

50.2

16

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

28.8

47

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

29.2

41

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
6.4 (5/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.7 (7/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.6 (5/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.7 (3/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Lithuania
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
5.6 (7/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
5.5 (6/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.9 (6/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.5 (7/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.0 (8/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.4 (4/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
5.3 (6/22)

158

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
4.8 (5/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.4 (10/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
Despite the war in Ukraine and energy price shocks,
the Lithuanian economy grew by around 2% in 2022,with exports up about 3%. High energy and commodity
prices were driving inflation upwards. Lithuania’s
fastest-growing sectors in 2022 were manufacturing,arts and entertainment, and professional and scientificservices.
Economic uncertainty has reduced investment,
and the cost of borrowing has increased, including for
the Lithuanian government. However, the risk of an
economic downturn may reduce the business need toborrow further.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022, the overall entrepreneurial environmentof Lithuania was assessed by its national experts
as having deteriorated since 2021, with its National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) scoredeclining from 6.1 to 5.8, although its ranking among
the 51 GEM economies only fell from fifth to sixth.
This decline was despite those national experts having
rated Lithuania’s response to the economic effects ofthe pandemic as excellent, scoring highest of all thoseeconomies.
In terms of individual Framework Conditions, 10of the 13 had lower scores in 2022 than in 2021, withthe largest falls being for Ease of Entry: Burdens andRegulation and for Physical Infrastructure, which
was still Lithuania’s highest-rated condition. Most of
the other changes were modest. Despite these falls,
Lithuania still had 10 framework conditions ranked
in the top 10 of the 51 economies in 2022. As in 2021,
just one condition was rated as insufficient (<5.0):
Entrepreneurial Education at School, which did edge alittle closer to sufficiency. Many economies with muchhigher incomes would welcome such a supportive
entrepreneurial environment.

Institution
Lead institution
Vilnius University Business School

Other institutions involvedEnterprise Lithuania

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
In 2022, three in 10 adults in Lithuania reported thatthe pandemic had reduced their household income,a relatively modest level, similar to in Latvia next door,
and ninth lowest of Level A economies. Just 6% of
adults invested in someone else’s new business in
2022, a relatively low figure no doubt aided by theavailability of entrepreneurial finance elsewhere.
Less than one in five of Lithuania’s adults intended tostart a business in the next three years, while around ahalf knew someone who had started their own businessrecently. A similar proportion regarded themselves
as having the skills and experience to start their own
business, while two in five saw good opportunities tostart a business locally in 2022, although nearly a half ofthese would be deterred by fear of failure.
The proportion of adults starting or running a new
business in Lithuania was 12.7%, while EBO was 8.3%
of adults, a sustainable ratio of three new to every two
Established Business Owners. In Lithuania, men were
almost twice as likely as women to be starting a new
business, suggesting that many women are missingout on the autonomy and income opportunities thatgo with owning your own business.
“To earn a living because jobs are scarce” was the
motivation with the highest level of agreement (twoout of three) among new entrepreneurs, although“to build great wealth or very high income” was also
agreed by about a half.
Lithuania is a small economy, and it is not surprisingthat two in five new entrepreneurs had customers
beyond its borders. This proportion may increase,because nearly three out of five new entrepreneurs
expected, in the next six months, to use moredigital technology to sell their products, offering
the potential of a wider customer base. Finally, job
creation expectations were good, with a quarter of
those starting or running a new business in Lithuania
anticipating employing another six or more people infive years’ time.
Team

Funders

Team leader

Moody’s Lithuania

Prof. Dr. Saule Maciukaite-ZvinieneEnterprise Lithuania

Team members
Vytenis Mockus

Type of institution
University
Websitehttps://www.vm.vu.lt/en/

Vilnius University Business School

Ieva Buziene, PhD

APS vendor

Natalya Lahotska, PhD

RAIT

Aneta Slekyte Kaminiene
Assoc. Prof. Vytautas Kuostis, PhD
Jone KalendieneJurgita Piesliakaite, PhD

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Contactsaule.maciukaite-zviniene@vm.vu.lt

159

ECONOMY PROFILE

Luxembourg
Q Population (2021): 0.6 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 134.8 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

41.3

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

52.4

29=

It is easy to start a business

64.2

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

39=

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

55.8

15

To build great wealth or very high income

48.3

34

15

To continue a family tradition

37.6

12

50.0

35

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

47.0

41

Fear of failure (opportunity)

44.1

25

Entrepreneurial intentions*

14.0

31

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

2.7

21=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

29.4

2

Always consider social impact

85.3

13

Always consider environmental impact

82.4

20

Industry (% TEA in business services)

40.3

3

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

7.0

39

5.4

8.5

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

5.3

33

3.5

6.6

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

27.5

41

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

49.7

18

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

55.0

20

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

50.7

17

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.4 (11/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.4 (19/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.6 (16/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.9 (18/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Luxembourg
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
5.2 (12/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.8 (14/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.2 (12/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
3.7 (20/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.7 (14/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.6 (15/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.9 (8/22)

160

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
4.2 (10/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.5 (8/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn 2022, GDP in Luxembourg was expected to increaseby 1.7%. while inflation was running at almost 7%, thehighest level since 1983. Meanwhile, to help businesses,
the government introduced a €500 million packageof business loan guarantees and reduced VAT by one
percentage point.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
A small economy with the highest GDP per capita
in the entire 2022 GEM National Expert Survey (NES)of 51 economies, Luxembourg ought to have anentrepreneurial environment to match its resources.
That environment was assessed in 2022 by its own
national experts as only just sufficient, with a National
Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI) score of 5.0, amarginal improvement on the previous year’s score of
4.9 (just insufficient). This score ranked Luxembourg
20th among the GEM economies. In 2020 it had scored
5.2 and ranked 13th. The pandemic can’t easily be
blamed for this change, since national experts alsoscored Luxembourg at well above sufficient in terms ofrecovery from the economic effects of COVID-19.
In 2022, Luxembourg had seven Framework
Conditions assessed as sufficient (≥5.0) and six as
insufficient. Sufficient conditions included government
policies and programs, the Physical Infrastructure, andSocial and Cultural Norms. Insufficient conditions wereEntrepreneurial Finance and the two ease of entry
conditions. So the sufficient conditions were largely
government-led, while the insufficient conditions
were largely market-driven. The insufficiency ofentrepreneurial finance is perhaps most surprising in arich economy with high-quality institutions.
Luxembourg’s two lowest-scoring conditions in 2021
— Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics and Entrepreneurial
Education at School — both improved their scoresmarkedly by 2022, but still didn’t surpass the otherconditions.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Luxembourg is a high-income, high-investment
economy, but the percentage of its adults investingin someone else’s new business declined in the earlyyears of the pandemic — from 8% in 2019 to 6% in

2021 — and then recovered in 2022 back to 8%. The
proportion of adults intending to start their own
business in the next three years followed a similar
pattern: some fall at the onset of the pandemic andrecovery since then. The 2022 level, well under one in
five, is almost back to the 2019 pre-pandemic level.
The percentage of adults starting or running a
new business in Luxembourg fell in the early days ofthe pandemic (from 10% in 2019 to 8% in 2020), andhas continued to decline slowly since, reaching 7% in
2022. Female entrepreneurship fell faster than maleentrepreneurship in those early days, but has since
recovered slightly, so that the relative gender gap in
2022 was little more than in 2019. EBO also declined
and then recovered. By 2022, the level (5.3%) was alittle higher than in 2019 (4.7%). In 2019, Luxembourg
had two adults starting a new business for every adultrunning an established business. By 2022 this ratio had
fallen closer to three to two.
Two out of five adults in Luxembourg know
someone who has recently started a business. Just overhalf of adults agree they have the skills and experience
to run their own business, with a similar proportion
seeing good opportunities to start a business locally,
though about half of these would be deterred by fearof failure.
Since GEM introduced questions about the
motivations of new entrepreneurs in 2019, a majorityof those starting or running a new business in
Luxembourg have agreed with the motive “to make adifference in the world”. In 2022, “To build great wealthor very high income” or “to earn a living because jobs
are scarce” follow closely behind.
Luxembourg is a small country, and it is not
surprising that a majority of its new entrepreneurs
have customers outside the country. The pandemic
may have encouraged new entrepreneurs in
Luxembourg to look outwards, because, in 2022, 58%of those new entrepreneurs had customers outsideof the country, compared to a pre-pandemic levelof 54% in 2019. In addition, more than a half of new
entrepreneurs expect, in the next six months, touse more digital technology to sell their products.
Job expectations are strong, with four in 10 new
entrepreneurs expecting to employ another six ormore people in five years’ time, up from three in 10
pre-pandemic in 2019.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

STATEC Research

TNS ILRESSTATEC ResearchFrancesco Sarracino
Team members

STATEC (National Institute of Statistics
and Economic Studies of the Grand
Duchy of Luxembourg)

Contact

Chiara Peroni

Chambre de Commerce Luxembourg

Maxime Pettinger

francesco.sarracino@statec.etat.lu

House of Entrepreneurship

Type of institution

Ministère de l’Économie

Public Body
Websitehttps://statistiques.public.lu/en/
statistique-publique/statec/red.html

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report161

ECONOMY PROFILE

MexicoQ Population (2021): 130.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 20.0 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

47.7

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

56.4

25

It is easy to start a business

46.3

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

32

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

68.2

9

To build great wealth or very high income

51.4

30

29

To continue a family tradition

53.1

3

67.1

15

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

86.9

5

Fear of failure (opportunity)

45.5

20

Entrepreneurial intentions*

17.5

24

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

3.1

19=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

4.3

38

Always consider social impact

85.2

14

Always consider environmental impact

87.5

9

Industry (% TEA in business services)

5.3

44

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

12.9

18=

12.1

13.8

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

1.6

49

1.0

2.2

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

77.5

3

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

48.5

20

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

78.9

4

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

54.9

12

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.4 (7/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.5 (13/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.0 (8/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.8 (12/16)

9
8
7
6
5

MexicoLevel B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
2.3 (15/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.3 (16/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
2.9 (14/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.7 (7/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.8 (12/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.4 (15/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.8 (15/16)

162

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
1.7 (6/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.3 (3/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPInflation has been rising in Mexico, reaching nearly 9%
in September 2022, its highest level in more than 20
years. GDP looks likely to have grown by 2% in 2022.
High inflation is modifying household consumption
patterns, while increases in interest rates have moved
resources from productive to speculative assets.
Credit is expensive in Mexico, and a major hurdle toentrepreneurship.
Federal government programs supporting
entrepreneurship initiatives have visibly decreased
over the last three years. However, some local state
governments, like Jalisco, Querétaro, Yucatán andNuevo León, have developed regional support
programs to improve the local entrepreneurship andinnovation ecosystems and, in some cases, provided
early-stage funding.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The quality of the Mexican entrepreneurial
environment, as assessed by its own national
experts and as measured by its overall National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score,
deteriorated significantly in 2022. In 2021, the overall
NECI score was 4.3, 30th among GEM economies.
By 2022 this had fallen to 3.8 and 44th. Nor was thisreduction confined to a few conditions. Twelve of
the 13 Framework Conditions scored lower in 2022
than in 2021. If a Framework Condition score of ≥5.0 is
regarded as sufficient, <4.0 as poor and <3.0 as very
poor, between 2021 and 2022 two conditions wentfrom sufficient to insufficient, two became poorand three went from poor to very poor, the latterincluding both government policy conditions plus
Ease of Entry: Burdens and Regulation. All three are
the direct responsibility of the government. At thesame time, Entrepreneurial Education at School, also a
responsibility of the government, went from an alreadylow score of 2.2 to 1.7, or from bad to worse. In 2022,
only Togo scored lower than Mexico for Entrepreneurial
Education at School. Quite a lot to learn.
It is difficult to attribute this deterioration to thepandemic, given that the same national experts scored
Mexico’s recovery from the economic impacts of thepandemic at 5.1. This is sufficient, but not outstanding.
The only condition scoring higher than the previous

year was Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics, thus
suggesting buoyant local markets. In the absence ofgovernment support, the best survival strategy for new
businesses may be to focus on those local markets.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Mexico last participated in the GEM Adult Population
Survey (APS) in 2019, so comparisons can only be madebetween then and 2022. There is no doubt that the
pandemic hit Mexico hard, with three out of four adults
reporting that it reduced household income in 2022.
If business intentions had been affected by the
pandemic, by 2022 they had almost recovered, with,in 2022, just under one in five adults intending to starta business in the next three years, compared to one
in four in 2019. As in 2019, almost one half of adults
in Mexico knew someone who had recently started
their own business, and more than two-thirds ofadults considered themselves to have the skills andexperience to do so themselves. The proportion of
adults seeing good opportunities to start a businesslocally in 2022 was more than one in two (56%), slightly
down from the 2019 level (63%). Almost half of thoseseeing good opportunities to start a business would bedeterred from doing so by the fear of failure.
The percentage of adults in Mexico starting or
running their own business was virtually the same in2022 as in 2019 (13%), while the proportion of adults
running an established business fell slightly from analready low 1.8% to 1.6%. The lack of new businesses
being sustained into established ones reflects the lackof resources and support provided by the Mexican
entrepreneurial environment.
Four in five of new entrepreneurs agreed with the
motivation “to earn a living because jobs are scarce”,
although more than two out of three also agreed withthe motivation “to make a difference in the world”, andmore than a half with “to continue a family tradition”.
The proportion of those starting or running a new
business with customers beyond Mexico was aroundone 10 in 2022, as it had been in 2019. Four out of fiveof those new entrepreneurs expected to use moredigital technology to sell their products in the next six
months. Just over one in four anticipated employing
another six or more people in five years’ time.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
José Ernesto Amorós, PhD

Instituto de Emprendimiento
Eugenio Garza Lagüera (Tecnológico
de Monterrey)

Berumen y Asociados S.A. de C.V.

Instituto Tecnológico y de Estudios
Superiores de Monterrey (ITESM)

José Manuel Aguirre, MSc
Team members
Elvira Naranjo, PhD

Contact
jmaguirre@tec.mx

Patricia Alonso, PhD
Type of institution
University
WebsiteLucía Rodríguez, PhD
Marcia Villasana, PhD
Margarita Herrera, PhD

https://tec.mx/en

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report163

ECONOMY PROFILE

MoroccoQ Population (2021): 37.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 8.1 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

51.6

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

62.5

17

It is easy to start a business

36.5

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

28

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

13.5

48

To build great wealth or very high income

61.2

20

36=

To continue a family tradition

19.5

42

63.3

21

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

82.5

10

Fear of failure (opportunity)

44.4

23

Entrepreneurial intentions*

37.3

11

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.2

40=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

4.0

39

Always consider social impact

58.9

46

Always consider environmental impact

55.6

45=

Industry (% TEA in business services)

11.8

36

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

4.2

48

3.1

5.4

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

4.1

37=

1.5

6.8

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

66.3

11

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

33.6

35

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

63.4

10

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

32.1

39

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.4 (11/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.2 (5/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.1 (5/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.4 (5/13)

9
8
7
6
5

MoroccoLevel C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
5.2 (4/13)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.2 (12/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.8 (4/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.5 (10/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.3 (6/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.2 (4/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.9 (7/13)

164

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.0 (9/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.3 (8/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPWith 8% growth in 2021, the Moroccan economy
rebounded from the losses of the first year of thepandemic. A series of overlapping shocks, including yet
another drought (the third in the last four years), andhigher prices for imported energy reduced that growth
to just 0.3% in Q1 2022.
Inflation had increased to 8% by August 2022. The
government has introduced measures to mitigate
its impacts on households and specific sectors,
substantially increasing pre-existing subsidies.
New initiatives include FORSA (opportunity in
Arabic), combining support and funding with regionaland gender equity. The government was exploring
ways to unlock the potential of the private sector,
including reform of Morocco’s large state-owned
enterprise system and a review of the investment
charter.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In the pandemic period, Morocco has been making
substantial efforts to improve its entrepreneurial
environment and there are some indications thatthose efforts are paying off. In 2020, Morocco’s national
expert assessments had resulted in an overall National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score of 3.8,
ranking Morocco 39th of 44 economies. By 2021, thisscore had improved to 3.9, but an increased number of
economies, and improving environments elsewhere,
meant that Morocco ranked 41st of 50 economies. In
2022, however, improvements across the board meantthat Morocco’s NECI score was 4.3, placing it 35th outof 51 economies.
In the period 2021 to 2022, Morocco improved in allof its Framework Condition scores except one: Ease of
Entry: Burdens and Regulation (the score stayed thesame). Of the 12 condition scores that improved, thebiggest increases were for the level of Entrepreneurial
Finance and for Entrepreneurial Education at School,
each important for future entrepreneurial success.
These are excellent achievements for a Level C
economy, although Ease of Entry: Burdens andRegulation with its unchanged score was perhaps thecondition most in need of improving. Among the 51
Institution
Lead institution
Entrepreneurship ResearchLaboratory, Faculty of Law, Economics
and Social Sciences
University of Hassan II Casablanca

Type of institution
University
Websitehttp://www.entrepreneurship.
univcasa.ma

economies, Morocco ranked 50th for this Framework
Condition, its lowest rank by some margin.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Around two out of three adults in Morocco in 2022
reported that the pandemic had reduced theirhousehold income, which was roughly average for aLevel C economy.
Business intentions had risen initially at the onsetof the pandemic, but have fallen steadily since then,reaching 37% in 2022, down from 48% in 2020. The
percentage of adults actually starting or running a
new business has fallen precipitously through the
pandemic years, from over 11% in 2019 to little morethan 4% in 2022. The level of EBO has also fallen, but
not as steeply, from almost 8% in 2019 to just over 4% in
2022. In the year before the pandemic, new start levels
had been half as much again as EBO, but by 2022 they
were both at virtually the same low level.
Despite these low levels of entrepreneurial activity,
around half of Moroccan adults knew someone who
had recently started their own business, while morethan three in five agreed they had the skills andexperience to be able to do the same, or saw good
opportunities to be able to do so locally, although, once
again, around half of these would be deterred by fearof failure.
Earning a living because jobs are scarce has
been the dominant agreed motivation among newentrepreneurs in Morocco since this question was
introduced by GEM in 2019, agreed by four out of fivein 2022. Both making a difference in the world andcontinuing a family tradition received relatively little
agreement in Morocco.
Nearly two in three new entrepreneurs expected touse more digital technology in the next six months tosell their products, and more than a quarter expected
to employ another six or more people in five years’
time. Relatively few of these new entrepreneurs
had customers outside of Morocco, although thatpercentage has been increasing recently (from 6% in2019 to 10% in 2022).

Team

Funders

Team leader

University of Hassan II Casablanca

Khalid El Ouazzani, PhD
Fatima Boutaleb

APS vendor

Team members

ClaireVision

Abdellatif Komat
Salah Koubaa
Hind Malainine

Contact

Sara Yassine

elouazzanik@gmail.com

Thomas Schottfboutaleb13@gmail.com

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report165

ECONOMY PROFILE

Netherlands
Q Population (2021): 17.5 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 63.8 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

54.5

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

61.6

19

It is easy to start a business

82.9

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

23

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

46.8

27

To build great wealth or very high income

45.8

40

2

To continue a family tradition

24.6

32

42.2

44

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

39.4

44

Fear of failure (opportunity)

33.8

44

Entrepreneurial intentions*

16.2

25

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

2.5

23=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

22.4

7

Always consider social impact

67.8

40

Always consider environmental impact

66.1

41

Industry (% TEA in business services)

30.8

14

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

12.5

21

9.6

15.3

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

6.8

22=

5.3

8.3

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

23.6

45

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

32.6

37

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

38.5

37

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

48.1

22

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
6.2 (6/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
6.3 (4/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.8 (2/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.0 (11/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Netherlands
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
5.5 (9/22)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
6.4 (3/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.0 (5/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.3 (11/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.0 (9/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.2 (8/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
5.5 (5/22)

166

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
5.1 (4/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.9 (4/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe economy of the Netherlands grew strongly in 2022,with GDP predicted to have increased by almost 5%
over the year. Increasing energy prices pushed inflation
above 11%.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The Netherlands has long had a high-quality
environment for entrepreneurship, and that continued
in 2022 with the Netherlands being just one of three
economies scored as sufficient (≥5.0) in all Framework
Conditions, alongside the United Arab Emirates andIndia. However, it saw falls in 12 of the 13 Framework
Condition scores compared to 2021. Hence the fallin the National Entrepreneurship Context Index(NECI) score for the overall quality of the Dutch
entrepreneurial environment from 6.3 in 2021 to 5.9
in 2022. As a result, the Netherlands dropped fromsecond in the NECI league table to fifth, now closely
followed by Switzerland, Indonesia and Lithuania.
The largest falls in Framework Condition scores werefor Physical Infrastructure, Government Policy: Taxes
and Bureaucracy and for Entrepreneurial Education at
School. Framework scores for the Netherlands remain
well above the average for Level A economies, except
for Government Policy: Support and Relevance. Thesescores put the Netherlands in the top 15 when ranked
by individual framework scores, apart from Ease of
Entry: Market Dynamics, where the score ranked 26th.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
For a high-income economy, the Netherlands
continues to have relatively strong levels ofentrepreneurial activity, with TEA at 12.5% in 2022,
which, although slightly down from the previous year
(14.2%), was still above the pre-pandemic level of 10.4%
in 2019. In the early stages of the pandemic, the levelof EBO had fallen sharply (from 10.8% in 2019 to 7%
in 2020), but has been fairly stable since then (6.8%
in 2022). Less than a quarter of adults reported a fallin household income in 2022 due to the pandemic,
a relatively low level even among Level A economies.
Informal investment actually increased during the
pandemic, from 4% of adults investing in someone
else’s new business in 2019 to 9% in 2020, a level
retained since then.
In 2022 more than half of Dutch adults knew a newentrepreneur, and even more saw good opportunities
to start a business locally. While confidence in theirown skills and experience was relatively low, theproportion of those who see good opportunities but
would be deterred by fear of failure was even lower.
Perhaps surprisingly, the level of maleentrepreneurship in the Netherlands has remained
higher than that of females. In 2022, three men started
a new business for every two women doing the same.
Pre-pandemic, the entrepreneurial gender gap wasmuch smaller — since then, male TEA has increased
faster than female TEA. Less surprisingly for a small
country, more than a third of new entrepreneurs
reported having customers from abroad, although only
two in five of those starting or running a new businessexpected to use more digital technology to sell theirproducts in the next six months, maybe because levels
were already high.
Business intentions have risen during the pandemic
years, with nearly one in five adults in the Netherlands
intending to start a business in the next three years,
up from just one in eight in 2019. No single motivation
dominated, with “to make a difference in the world”,“to build great wealth or very high income” and “toearn a living because jobs are scarce” each agreed byaround two in five new entrepreneurs. Less than one infour agreed they had started a business “to continue afamily tradition”.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
Jacqueline Snijders

The Ministry of Economic Affairs andClimate Policy of the Netherlands

GDCC and PanelClix

Panteia

Team members

Contact

Paul van der Zeijden

j.snijders@panteia.nl

Dr Jan de Kok, Phd
Type of institution
Research InstituteMartin Clarke
Pim Zijlstra

Websitehttps://www.panteia.com

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

167

ECONOMY PROFILE

NorwayQ Population (2021): 5.4 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 79.2 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

42.6

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

73.6

8

It is easy to start a business

82.8

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

38

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

48.0

24

To build great wealth or very high income

46.1

39

3

To continue a family tradition

22.9

35

49.2

39

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

30.4

47

Fear of failure (opportunity)

41.0

35=

Entrepreneurial intentions*

5.5

46

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.5

35

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

11.0

25

Always consider social impact

48.5

49

Always consider environmental impact

61.8

43

Industry (% TEA in business services)

38.7

4

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

6.5

42

4.5

8.3

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

5.6

31=

3.5

7.6

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

8.6

49

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

39.1

30

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

47.7

28

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

36.0

33

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.5 (9/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.6 (17/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.3 (18/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.4 (9/22)

9
8
7
6
5

NorwayLevel A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.3 (16/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
5.2 (8/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.4 (10/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
3.6 (22/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.9 (10/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.4 (3/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.6 (13/22)

168

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
4.5 (8/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.5 (9/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn 2022, economic activity in Norway was constrainedby labour shortages, with unemployment runningat less than 2%. Consumption was expected to fall ashousehold purchasing power declines due to inflation
and rising interest rates.
Some targeted COVID-19-related support forbusinesses continued in 2022.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Norway was rated very highly by its national experts
in terms of the quality of its economic recovery fromthe impacts of COVID-19, scoring 6.9 and being
ranked third out of these economies. In terms ofentrepreneurial actions in support of the United
Nations Sustainable Development Goals, Norwayscored slightly lower but was ranked first.
However, and as with Sweden next door, Norway
experienced a sharp decline in the quality of its
entrepreneurial framework in the period 2021–2022.
Scores for 11 of 13 Framework Conditions declined,with the largest falls for Government Policy: Taxes andBureaucracy; Entrepreneurial Education at School;
and Research and Development Transfers. It is not acoincidence that the government has a substantial
influence on each of these, as well as on Government
Policy: Support and Relevance and Government
Entrepreneurial Programs, scores for each of which
also fell, albeit not as far. As with Sweden, resources
should be an issue, with Norway ranked third of the
51 GEM National Expert Survey (NES) participating
economies in 2022 in terms of GDP per capita, behind
only Qatar and Luxembourg.
As a result of these declining Framework Condition
scores, the overall entrepreneurial environment
quality score for Norway, as measured by the National
Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI), fell to 5.2 in 2022,
a rank of 14th, having scored 5.7 and ranked 7th just ayear earlier.
There are some important questions raisedby some of the individual framework scores. For
example, how can an economy ranked fifth forthe quality of its Commercial and Professional
Infrastructure also rank 49th for its Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics? How can such a high-income
economy be scored as insufficient (<5.0) on both
entrepreneurial finance conditions?

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Less than one in 10 adults in Norway reported that
their household income had been reduced by the
pandemic in 2022, lowest of all the GEM economies bysome margin, as it has been since this question was
first asked in the GEM Adult Population Survey (APS)
in 2020. Despite this, the percentage of Norwegian
adults starting or running a new business had morethan halved in the early stages of the pandemic, from
8% in 2019 to 3% in 2021, but then more than doubled
in 2022 (to 7%). This volatility was reflected in bothmale and female entrepreneurship, with the relative
gender gap of two male entrepreneurs to each female
entrepreneur being more or less maintained overthis period. The level of EBO has been more stable,
although this also declined in the first two years of thepandemic, before recovering in 2022 to a level (6%) thatmatched that of 2019.
Just over 5% of Norwegian adults had invested insomeone else’s new business in 2022, while 6% of
adults intend to start a business in the next three years,
both proportions changing little over the pandemic
cycle, and both relatively low, even for a high-income
European economy.
As in its Swedish neighbour, half of Norwegian
adults considered themselves as having the skills andexperience to start their own business, slightly morethan those who knew someone who has started abusiness recently. Again like Sweden, three out of four
Norwegian adults saw good opportunities to starta business locally, although just under half of thesewould be deterred by fear of failure. However, unlike in
Sweden, more new entrepreneurs have been finding
customers outside of the country, with this proportion
rising from 24% to 32% in 2022. More than half of new
entrepreneurs expected to use more digital technology
in the next six months to sell their products, while one
in five were expecting to employ another six or more
people in five years’ time.
Finally, and despite the pandemic, “to make adifference in the world” remained the dominant agreed
motivation among new Norwegian entrepreneurs, as
it had been since these questions were first asked in
2019, although the motivation “to build great wealthor very high income” was catching up quickly, having
more than doubled in terms of the proportion of new
entrepreneurs between 2019 and 2022.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Innovation Norway

Polarfakta AS

Nord University Business School

Professor Gry Agnete Alsos

The Norwegian Ministry of Trade,Industry, and Fisheries

Team members
Marta Lindvert
Type of institution
University
WebsiteNord University Business School

Karin Wigger

Contact
gry.a.alsos@nord.no

Sølvi Solvoll
Marit Breivik-Meyer
Iselin Kristine Mauseth Steirahttps://www.nord.no

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report169ECONOMY PROFILEOman
Q Population (2021): 5.2 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 31.1 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

58.5

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

75.7

6

It is easy to start a business

56.5

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

19

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

32.8

38

To build great wealth or very high income

75.1

11

18

To continue a family tradition

36.9

13

57.6

25

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

73.2

17

Fear of failure (opportunity)

33.3

46

Entrepreneurial intentions*

44.3

9

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.7

30=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

7.4

30

Always consider social impact

54.6

48

Always consider environmental impact

48.5

48

Industry (% TEA in business services)

14.4

33

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

11.7

23

11.6

11.8

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

4.1

37=

2.6

5.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

45.5

25

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

25.1

45

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

54.7

21

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

51.9

14

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.0 (5/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.0 (7/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.9 (10/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
4.6 (16/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Oman
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.3 (4/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.7 (14/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.2 (11/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.6 (12/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.7 (13/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.1 (16/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.9 (7/16)

170

D1. Entrepreneurial
3.8 (3/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.4 (11/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe Sultanate of Oman government is implementing“Oman Vision 2040”, aiming to diversify the economy
and increase the contribution of non-oil sectors. The
Oman economy grew by just over 2% in 2021, with
inflation low at 1.5%. However, recent increases inprices, especially for raw materials and machinery, areputting pressure on business margins and impacting
sales turnover and SME sustainability.
The government has changed the legal framework
to support SMEs who have financial claims, or
who have defaulted on bank loans, while the SME
Development Authority offers financial support
through a number of schemes.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022, the quality of Oman’s entrepreneurial
environment, as measured by the GEM National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score derived
from the assessments of its own national experts, has
improved slightly from the year before, scoring 4.2,
less than sufficient (<5.0) and ranked 38th among the
51 GEM economies, but better than 4.1 a year earlier(also ranked 38th). In 2022, just one of 13 Framework
Conditions — Social and Cultural Norms — scored as
sufficient; and, while six conditions had improved theirscores since 2021, seven had lower scores. The largest
increase was for Entrepreneurial Education at School,
and the largest decrease was for Ease of Entry: Market
Dynamics.
As recently as 2020, Oman had an overall qualityof entrepreneurial environment score of 5.1, morethan sufficient, and was ranked 13th among GEM
economies. In that year, seven Framework Conditions
were assessed as sufficient, compared to one in 2022.
One indication of this change since 2020 could be in
the score for recovery from the economic impactsof the pandemic: just 3.9, above only Togo of the 51
economies participating in the GEM National Expert
Survey (NES) in 2022. So the pandemic looks tohave had a serious negative impact on the Omani
entrepreneurial environment.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
This negative impact is also shown by more than
two in five adults reporting that the pandemic had
reduced their household income in 2022, a figure
Institution
Lead institution
University of Nizwa

WebsiteTeam members

http://www.unizwa.edu.om

Mr. Bader Alsuleimani

https://www.sme.gov.om/

Prof. Norizan Mohd Kassim

Other institutions involved
Small and Medium Enterprises
Development Authority

SMEs Development Authority
Type of institution
University
Organization

little changed since 2020. This may account for thefall in the percentage of adults in Oman investing insomeone else’s new business, from 14% in 2019 to 8%
in 2022. Over the same period, the proportion of adults
intending to start their own business has fallen steadily
each year, from almost two in three to less than one in
two.
Most people in Oman know someone who has
recently started their own business, although theproportion had fallen slightly from seven in 10 in2019 to six in 10 in 2022. More than half of adults inOman consider themselves to have the skills andexperience to start a business, and three in four see
good opportunities to do so locally, while a relatively
low one in three of these would be deterred by the fearof failure.
At the start of the pandemic, the percentage ofadults actually starting or running a new businessmore than doubled, from 7% in 2019 to 16% in 2020. It
then fell to 13% the following year, and again to 12% in
2022. However, there are gender differences concealedby these averages. Female new entrepreneurshipincreased sharply between 2019 and 2020, from 6%
to 17%, presumably as women sought new incomesor seized new opportunities. This rate then fellback to 12% in 2021 and 2022. Meanwhile, male newentrepreneurship also increased in 2020 but much lessquickly, and has since fallen back to more or less match
the female rate in 2022.
The level of EBO in Oman is relatively low, at just
4% in 2022, despite having doubled since 2019. So
in 2022 there were three new businesses for every
established business, implying that the entrepreneurial
environment has not been conducive to new
businesses transitioning into established ones.
Agreement among new entrepreneurs with the
motive “to earn a living because jobs are scarce” isup from a half in 2019 to three in four in 2022, now
matching the proportion agreeing with the motive “tobuild great wealth or very high income”.
A half of new entrepreneurs expect, in the next six
months, to use more digital technology to sell theirproducts, while one in seven expect to employ anothersix or more people in five years’ time. Meanwhile,around one in five of those starting new or running
new businesses in Oman in 2022 were selling goods
or services that were either new to their area, new to
Oman or new to the world.

Ms. Kawther Al Kindi
Dr. Swadhin Kumar Mondal
Mr. Mohammed Al Maawaly

Team

Funders

Team leader

University of Nizwa

Dr. Abdallah Mohammed Alshukaili

SMEs Development Authority

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

APS vendor
Horizons Statistical Consulting

Contact
a.alshukaili@unizwa.edu.om
alsuleimani@unizwa.edu.om
nkassim@unizwa.edu.om
kawther.alkindi@nct.edu.om
swadhin@unizwa.edu.om
maawali@unizwa.edu.om

171

ECONOMY PROFILE

PanamaQ Population (2021): 4.4 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 31.7 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

48.0

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

53.4

27=

It is easy to start a business

54.2

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

30

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

68.5

8

To build great wealth or very high income

59.5

23

21

To continue a family tradition

45.7

7

76.7

7

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

85.0

8

Fear of failure (opportunity)

48.3

17

Entrepreneurial intentions*

53.0

1=

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

11.2

2

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

3.6

41

Always consider social impact

90.9

2=

Always consider environmental impact

93.7

1

Industry (% TEA in business services)

11.5

37

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

27.9

3

24.6

31.2

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

5.8

28

3.7

7.9

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

70.4

9

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

58.1

8

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

80.3

3

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

61.1

7

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.5 (3/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.1 (16/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.6 (13/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.5 (7/16)

9
8
7
6
5

PanamaLevel B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.0 (12/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.3 (9/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.9 (7/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.0 (15/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.8 (7/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.4 (8/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.7 (8/16)

172

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.6 (8/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.5 (9/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
After GDP in Panama fell by 18% in 2020 due to thepandemic, recovery has been strong, with a 15%
increase in 2021 and 12% growth in the first quarter of2022. Inflation, running at just 1.5% for consumer prices,
has had little impact on entrepreneurship.
Since the implementation of Law 186 in 2021/2022,
regulating entrepreneurship, complex legal procedures
have been simplified, excessive costs reduced andseveral tax benefits increased.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The assessed quality of Panama’s overall
entrepreneurial framework, as measured by its
National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score,has endured a roller-coaster ride over the pandemic
period. It scored 4.0, ranked 44th in 2019, at the onsetof the pandemic and increased to 4.2 in 2020, ranked
32nd, before falling to 3.9 in 2021, ranked 42nd, andthen surging to 4.3, ranked 34th, in 2022. So both theoverall score and ranking were, in 2022, pretty muchback to what they had been in 2020.
There is no doubt that Panama’s expert-assessed
Framework Conditions in 2022 were much improvedin 2021, with 12 conditions improving their scores andjust one, Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics, falling. These
across-the-board improvements were highest forSocial and Cultural Norms, Entrepreneurial Education
at School and for Government Entrepreneurial
Programs. These gains were enough to push bothSocial and Cultural Norms, and Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure, into sufficiency (≥5.0), withthe former achieving Panama’s highest rank of 17th
among the 51 GEM economies.
However, there remains much work to be done in
Panama, both to consolidate recent improvements
and to begin to address some remaining weaknesses.
Just how much work can be illustrated by Panama’s
national experts’ score of 3.6 for Ease of Access toEntrepreneurial Finance: not Panama’s worst score but
by far its lowest rank — 48th of the 51 economies.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The proportion of adults in Panama reporting that
their household income had been reduced by the
pandemic remained high in 2022, at more thanInstitution
Lead institution
City of Knowledge Foundation

Type of institution
Foundation
Websitehttps://ciudaddelsaber.org/en
Other institutions involved
IESA Management School (PanamaCampus)seven in 10, as it has been since this was first asked
in the GEM Adult Population Survey (APS) in 2020.
Despite the pandemic, the percentage of adults inPanama investing in someone else’s business has
been increasing in recent years, from just 3% in 2018
to almost 9% in 2022, although this may simply reflect
poor returns on alternative investment opportunities.
The intention to start a business in the next three years
was both high and rising, up from a half of all adults in2019 to a bit more than this in 2022.
Entrepreneurial confidence was relatively highamong adults in Panama, with more than three infour agreeing they have the skills and experienceto start their own business. Almost half knew
someone who has recently started a business,with a slightly higher proportion seeing good
opportunities to start a business locally, although,and once more, a half of these would be deterredby fear of failure.
The percentage of adults starting or running a
new business in Panama has fluctuated in recent
years, rising at the onset of the pandemic (from
23% to 33% between 2019 and 2020), then fallingback (22% in 2021), and finally increasing in 2022
(to 28%). Over the same period, the relative gender
gap in entrepreneurship narrowed slightly. In 2019,
there were four men starting or running a new
business for every three women doing the same.
By 2022 this ratio had become five to four. EBO
has been more stable than new entrepreneurship,
falling a little and then increasing (4.7% in 2019 and5.8% in 2022).
“To earn a living because jobs are scarce” hasbeen agreed as a motivation by four out of five newentrepreneurs since these questions were introduced
by GEM in 2019. “To make a difference in the world” hasalso been agreed by two-thirds or more over the same
period.
The percentage of new entrepreneurs in Panama
with customers beyond that country has fallen
recently, from 17% in 2020 to 10% in 2022. One way
to reach customers elsewhere is through digitaltechnologies: four in five new entrepreneurs expected,
in the next six months, to use more digital technology
to sell their products. Job expectations were high, with
two in five new entrepreneurs expecting to employ anadditional six people in five years’ time.

Team

Funders

Team leader

AMPYME

Alejandro Carbonell
Team members

APS vendor

Carla Donalicio

IPSOS

Federico Fernandez Dupouy
Cristina Collazos

Contact
acarbonell@cdspanama.org

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report173

ECONOMY PROFILE

PolandQ Population (2021): 37.8 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 37.5 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

46.7

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

72.3

9

It is easy to start a business

79.4

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

36

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

16.7

46

To build great wealth or very high income

47.6

36

5

To continue a family tradition

14.4

47

47.8

40

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

73.1

18

Fear of failure (opportunity)

53.1

6

Entrepreneurial intentions*

2.5

49

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

0.3

49

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

3.7

40

Always consider social impact

85.4

11=

Always consider environmental impact

83.5

16

Industry (% TEA in business services)

19.5

26=

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

1.6

49

1.6

1.5

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

9.8

9

9.6

10.0

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

60.8

15

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

30.2

39

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

29.1

46

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

38.1

31

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.2 (8/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.9 (8/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.4 (14/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.5 (14/16)

9
8
7
6
5

PolandLevel B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
2.7 (13/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.0 (12/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.5 (13/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
6.4 (4/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.4 (15/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.4 (14/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.8 (16/16)

174

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
1.8 (15/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
3.1 (16/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn Q3 2022, Poland’s economy grew by just under 4%.
Higher energy and food prices pushed inflation to 16%
in October 2022. The labour market remained robust,with unemployment at an all-time low of 5%. Higher
prices and increasing energy costs were the primaryconcerns of entrepreneurs, some of whom may havebeen deterred by rising economic uncertainty.
Poland introduced widespread tax reforms in 2022
(the “Polish Deal)”, raising tax thresholds and providing
some extra incentives for entrepreneurs, including tax
reliefs for robotization and for prototypes, as well as
relief to encourage Poles to return from abroad.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Poland continued to score below average for the qualityof all its Framework Conditions, apart from Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics, compared to other Level B economies
in the 2022 GEM National Expert Survey (NES).. The
quality of its entrepreneurial framework actuallydiminished in 2022, with its score for overall quality in
the National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI)
falling from 4.2 in 2021 (36th) to just 3.8 in 2022 (45th).
This reduction was because of falls in nine of 13
framework condition scores, leaving Poland with justtwo conditions assessed as sufficient (≥5.0): Ease of
Entry: Market Dynamics and Physical Infrastructure,
Eleven are insufficient, usually by a wide margin.
Eight Framework Conditions scored less than four in
2022, compared to five the year before. Government
must bear at least some of the responsibility for thisdeterioration, with both government policy conditionsand Government Entrepreneurial Programs having
lower scores this year than last. One bright note wasslightly higher scores for both educational Framework
Conditions.
The expert assessment of the Entrepreneurial
Framework Conditions has never been so pessimistic
in the 11-year history of collecting GEM data in
Poland. Even conditions such as Ease of Access to
Entrepreneurial Finance, Government Entrepreneurial
Programs, Government Policy: Support and Relevanceand Commercial and Professional Infrastructure saw
a drop from usually decent scores. Areas that haveneeded action for years, such as level of Research andDevelopment Transfers as well as Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy, were assessed even lower thisyear.
These results constitute a red flag for the Polishgovernment and require appropriate strategies,

Institution
Lead institution
Polish Agency for Enterprise
Development (PARP)

Type of institution
Public Body

radical actions and significant investment. However,much of the blame for the falling quality of Poland’s
entrepreneurial environment can be attributed to thewar next door in Ukraine and its repercussions, whichappear to have impacted Poland more than Ukraine’s
other neighbours in the 2022 GEM economies(Hungary, the Slovak Republic and Romania).

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
As in 2021, more than half of Polish adults reported thatthe pandemic had reduced their household income
in 2022, the highest level among European economies
participating in the 2022 Adult Population Survey(APS). Perhaps as a result, adults in Poland had very
low business intentions, with just under 3% expecting
to start a business in the next three years, well below
the pre-pandemic level of 8% in 2019.
The percentage of adults starting or running a
new business in Poland collapsed at the start ofthe pandemic, from 5.4% in 2019 to 3.% in 2020, andhas continued to fall, reaching 1.7% in 2022 as risingtensions and the conflict in next-door Ukraine havecompounded the impacts of rising prices and businessuncertainty. This in an economy where almost 9% of
adults were starting or running a new business justfive years ago. EBO had also fallen, though not as
sharply: from 12% in 2020 to 10% in 2022. Given the lowlevel of new starts, future falls in the level of establishedbusinesses may be likely.
In terms of social perceptions, Poland was little
different from its neighbours, or indeed the European
average. A half of Polish adults reported knowing a
new entrepreneur, and three out of four saw goodconditions to start a new business, although more thanhalf would have been deterred from doing so by thefear of failure.
The small number of new entrepreneurs in Poland
in 2022 make it very difficult to compare within thatgroup. “To earn a living because jobs are scarce” hasbecome by far the dominant motivation, agreed byalmost three-quarters of new entrepreneurs. Relatively
few new entrepreneurs in Poland had customers
outside of that country, although a significant
proportion (three in 10) expected to use more digitaltechnology in the next six months to sell theirproducts. Just one in 10 new entrepreneurs expected
to employ another six or more people in five years’time.

WebsiteTeam members

https://en.parp.gov.pl

Melania Nieć

Other institutions involved
Polish Agency for Enterprise
Development

Anna Skowrońska
Paulina Zadura
Robert Zakrzewski

University of Economics in Katowice

Przemysław Zbierowski

Team

Funders

Team leader

Ministry of Development Funds andRegional Policy

Anna Tarnawa

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

University of Economics in Katowice

APS vendor
Centrum Badań Marketingowych
INDICATOR Sp. z o.o.

Contact
anna_tarnawa@parp.gov.pl175

ECONOMY PROFILE

Puerto Rico
Q Population (2021): 3.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 34.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

66.0

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

64.1

13

It is easy to start a business

26.7

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

9

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

70.6

6

To build great wealth or very high income

48.6

33

45

To continue a family tradition

29.5

25

68.9

14

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

67.2

24

Fear of failure (opportunity)

45.2

21

Entrepreneurial intentions*

26.3

17

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

6.3

8

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

9.5

26

Always consider social impact

89.4

6

Always consider environmental impact

90.3

6

Industry (% TEA in business services)

22.4

21

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

20.0

8=

17.9

22.3

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

5.6

31=

3.4

8.0

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

56.0

20

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

55.1

11

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

78.4

5

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

66.9

3

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.6 (6/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.6 (11/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.6 (12/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.1 (15/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Puerto Rico
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
2.5 (14/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.6 (15/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
2.6 (15/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.9 (11/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.1 (9/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.9 (12/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.5 (9/16)

176

D1. Entrepreneurial
2.2 (13/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.8 (7/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPFor the fiscal year to end June 2022, the Puerto Ricoeconomy grew by around 4%, with an unemployment
rate of 6% and consumer prices rising a little fasterthan this. Rising energy costs have added to thealready high costs of doing business in Puerto Rico,
while changing household consumption patterns
in response to rising prices is adding to businessuncertainty.
In May 2022, the Department of Economic
Development and Commerce (DDEC, in Spanish)
unveiled PRopósito (“purpose”), a strategic framework
including entrepreneurship as a growth pillar that is
intended to create a more competitive entrepreneurial
ecosystem by streamlining the permit process andfacilitating access to capital programs, incentives andother benefits.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Puerto Rico did not participate in the 2021 GEM National
Expert Survey (NES), so comparisons will mostly bemade between 2020 and 2022 results. In terms of thequality of its overall entrepreneurial environment, asassessed by its national experts and as measured by the
National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI), Puerto
Rico has been improving steadily in recent years, from ascore of 3.2 in 2019, ranked 53rd of 54 economies, to 3.6
in 2020, 42nd of 44, and then to a score of 3.8, ranked
42nd of 51 economies in the GEM NES in 2022.
However, the entrepreneurial environment in Puerto
Rico remains weak, despite those improvements, with
12 of 13 Framework Conditions scored as insufficient(<5.0) in 2022, one more than two years earlier. In that
two-year period, eight conditions did improve theirscores, including both government policy conditions,both entrepreneurial education conditions and thescore for Government Entrepreneurial Programs,
which, with the policy changes noted above, provides
clear indications that the Puerto Rico government isincreasing its commitment to entrepreneurship.
There is much room for continuing improvement,with Puerto Rico still having six conditions ranked in
the bottom 10 of the 51 economies. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy was the lowest, ranked at 49th.
Conversely, Puerto Rico had no conditions in the top
half of ranks in 2022. Its highest-ranked condition was
Social and Cultural Norms at 28th.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Puerto Rico last participated in the GEM Adult
Population Survey (APS) in 2019, pre-pandemic, so
comparisons are limited to then and 2022. Levels ofentrepreneurial activity have improved substantiallyover that period, despite more than half of adults in
Puerto Rico reporting that the pandemic had reduced
their household income in 2022.
The percentage of adults starting or running a new
business in Puerto Rico increased from 13.4% in 2019
to 20% in 2022. The percentage of adults running anestablished business increased at an even faster rate,from a very low 1.3% in 2019 to a more sustainable
5.6% in 2022, reducing the ratio of adults starting a
new business to those running an established one,from an extreme of 10 to one to a still high five toone. Men are more likely than women to be starting a
new business, roughly three male starts to every two
female ones.
Corresponding to these increases inentrepreneurial activity rates has been
improvements in social perceptions. In 2020, twoout of three adults knew someone who had recently
started a business, having been less than a half in
2019. The share of adults considering themselvesto have the skills and experience to start their own
business followed a similar pattern, rising fromjust over a half to almost seven in 10, as did the
proportion seeing good opportunities to start abusiness locally, from just two in five in 2019 to morethan three in five in 2022.
In 2019, “to earn a living because jobs are scarce” hadbeen the most commonly agreed motivation among
new entrepreneurs in Puerto Rico, agreed by morethan four in five, with two-thirds agreeing with “tomake a difference in the world”. By 2022 this situation
had been reversed, with more than seven out of 10
agreeing with making a difference and just under
two-thirds with making a living.
Also in 2022, four out of five of those starting or
running a new business expected, in the next six
months, to use more digital technology to sell theirproducts, while three in 10 expected to employ anothersix or more people in five years’ time, up from a quarterin 2019.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
Theany M. Calderon Abreu

University of Puerto Rico School ofBusiness, Rio Piedras Campus

Gaither International

University of Puerto Rico School ofBusiness, Rio Piedras Campus

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico

Contact

Team members
Arleen Hernandez

The Department of Economic
Development and Commerce

Segundo Castro

theany.calderon1@upr.edu

Jairo Arturo Ayala

Type of institution
Business School
Websitehttps://www.uprrp.edu/english/

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report177ECONOMY PROFILE

Qatar
Q Population (2021): 2.9 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 93.5 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

64.2

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

81.0

3

It is easy to start a business

67.3

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)% TEA

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

46.9

26

To build great wealth or very high income

82.0

4

11

To continue a family tradition

32.5

20

64.1

19

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

59.9

33

Fear of failure (opportunity)

43.0

29

Entrepreneurial intentions*

43.6

10

10

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

6.2

9

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

11.5

23

Always consider social impact

78.7

22

Always consider environmental impact

82.7

17

Industry (% TEA in business services)

27.5

17

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

10.7

25=

11.0

10.6

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

3.9

39

2.1

4.4

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

44.1

28

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

36.0

32

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

55.6

18

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

60.0

8

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
6.7 (4/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.8 (16/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.8 (13/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.6 (13/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Qatar
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
5.2 (11/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
5.1 (9/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.7 (9/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
6.0 (6/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.8 (13/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.0 (10/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
5.6 (4/22)

178

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
5.7 (3/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
6.2 (2/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe Qatar economy grew by more than 6% in Q2
2022, with consumer prices rising by just under 5% in
October 2022, while unemployment was virtually zeroin Qatar (0.3%).

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2019, pre-pandemic, the quality of Qatar’s
entrepreneurial environment, as assessed by its
experts, was expressed by a National Entrepreneurial
Context Index (NECI) score of 5.9, ranking Qatar thirdamong the GEM economies. By 2020 this score had
declined to 5.7, with a ranking of eighth, and by 2021
to 5.5, but still ranked eighth. In 2022, Qatar’s NECI
score jumped back to 5.7. However, improvements
in entrepreneurial environments elsewhere meantthat this score only placed it 10th out of the 51 GEM
economies in 2022.
Qatar’s NECI score increase can be attributed to
improvements in the assessed quality of seven of the
13 Framework Conditions between 2021 and 2022.
The biggest increases were for Social and Cultural
Norms, and for Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics, withmodest increases elsewhere. Two conditions saw theirscores decline slightly — Research and Development
Transfers and Physical Infrastructure. Qatar scores very
well on both entrepreneurial education conditions(school and post-school stage), each ranked thirdout of 51 economies, but relatively poorly on both thelevel of, and access to, entrepreneurial finance. Finally,
Qatar’s national experts rated its recovery from theeconomic effects of the pandemic as well sufficient,but firmly in the middle range of GEM economies.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The proportion of adults in Qatar reporting that
their household income had declined because of
the pandemic was 44% in 2022 but lower than a year
earlier, when it had been 52%. Informal investments

were also relatively high, with 11% of adults investing insomeone else’s new business in 2022.
Just under a half of all adults in Qatar intend to
start their own business in the next three years, a
proportion that has, despite the pandemic, changed
little in the last four years. However, the proportion
actually doing so is much lower, with just 11% of
adults in Qatar starting or running their own businessin 2022, well down on the 17% two years earlier.
This proportion had increased at the start of thepandemic, having been 15% in 2019, but has fallenyear by year since. Women were slightly more likely
than men to be starting their own business in Qatar
in 2022, as they had been pre-pandemic in 2019. In
between, however, the rate of men starting new
businesses was much higher than that of women. So
at the onset of the pandemic, and in its early days,
many more men than women took the opportunity
to start their own business. By 2022, virtual parity had
been restored.
Two out of three adults in Qatar know someone
who has recently started a business, or consider they
have the skills and experience to do so themselves.
More than four in five see good opportunities to starta business locally, but nearly half of these would bedeterred by fear of failure.
“To build great wealth or very high income” hasbeen the most common motivation among newentrepreneurs since this question was introduced by
GEM, and was agreed by more than four out of fivein 2022. “To continue a family tradition” got some
support, agreed by a third.
Almost a quarter of those starting or running a new
business have customers outside of Qatar, a proportion
that has been fairly stable in recent years. About a half
expect, in the next six months, to use more digitaltechnology to sell their products. Job expectations arevery strong, with three out of five new entrepreneurs
expecting to employ another six or more people in five
years’ time.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Qatar Development Bank (QDB)

Wise Consultancy

Qatar Development Bank

Farha Al Kuwari
Team members

Contact

Ahmed Badawy

falkuwari@qdb.qa

Mohammed AbughaliType of institution

Dalal Al Shammari

Public Body
Websitehttps://www.qdb.qa/en

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report179ECONOMY PROFILE

Republic of Korea
Q Population (2021): 51.7 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 46.9 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

39.5

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

41.0

39

It is easy to start a business

37.4

35

Personally have the skills and knowledge

54.8

27

Fear of failure (opportunity)

18.3

49

Entrepreneurial intentions*

23.9

18

(somewhat or strongly agree)41
To make a difference in the world% TEA

Rank/49

8.4

49

79.2

7

To continue a family tradition

4.6

49

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

27.1

48

To build great wealth or very high income

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

4.0

13=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

4.7

36

Always consider social impact

67.7

41

Always consider environmental impact

62.2

42

Industry (% TEA in business services)

15.4

32

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

11.9

22

8.5

15.2

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

19.9

1

15.3

24.3

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

35.0

31

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

49.6

19

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

46.4

31

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

10.5

49

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.9 (7/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.2 (10/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.2 (8/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.4 (8/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Republic of Korea
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
6.2 (4/22)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.9 (10/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.9 (7/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.8 (1/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.2 (7/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.2 (19/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.9 (10/22)

180

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
4.6 (6/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.1 (12/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn 2021, Korean GDP reached almost $1,800 billion, with
inflation and unemployment both running at less than
3%. However, recent price increases have dampened
investor sentiment for late startups, and theventure capital industry is shifting to an investment
atmosphere that focuses on fund recovery rather thangrowth potential.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The Republic of Korea has a high-quality
entrepreneurial environment. In 2022, just three ofits 13 Framework Conditions were rated by experts
as insufficient (<5.0), and only one (Entrepreneurial
Education at School) by a significant margin. In
2022, seven Framework Conditions had improved
scores over 2021, while four saw their scores
decline, and none by much. In 2022, the Republicof Korea had six Framework Conditions ranked in
the top 10 of the 51 economies, and just one in thelower half of ranks: Commercial and Professional
Infrastructure.
The Republic of Korea’s overall quality ofentrepreneurial environment score in 2022, as
measured by the National Entrepreneurial Context
Index (NECI), was 5.7, ranking it ninth out of the 51 GEM
economies. In 2021, its score had been the same, but it
ranked one place higher at eighth.
Two of the Korean Framework Conditions wereassessed as insufficient in 2022 by the smallest of
margins: just a slight improvement could push theminto sufficiency. The third, Entrepreneurial Education
at School, as in many economies, requires substantial
new investment for long-term improvements.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The Republic of Korea has felt the economic impactsof the pandemic, with a third of adults reporting thatit had reduced their household income in 2022, a
proportion little changed in two years. Despite this,in 2022 around a quarter of adults expected to start abusiness in the next three years: again, a proportion
that has changed little.
Two in five Korean adults knew someone who had
started a business, or saw good opportunities locallyto do so themselves. Confidence was abundant, withmore than half of adults considering themselves as
having the skills and experience to start their own.
Another indication of that confidence was that lessthan one in five of those seeing good opportunities
locally would be deterred by the fear of failure.
Despite this confidence, the percentage of Korean
adults starting or running a new business has
fallen slowly through the pandemic to 12% in 2022,
having been 15% in 2019. Over the same period, theentrepreneurial gender gap has widened. In 2019 three
men were starting a new business for every woman
doing the same. Female new entrepreneurship has
fallen faster than that of men since, so that by 2022
there were nearly two men starting a business forevery woman doing so.
EBO tells a very different story, having risen from 13%
in 2019 to 20% in 2022. That story is the exact opposite
to nearby China. In 2019 in Korea there was just over
one adult running an established business for every
adult starting a new business. By 2022, there were
almost two adults running an established business forevery adult starting a new one.
The Republic of Korea’s new entrepreneurs are very
consistent in their choice of motivations. In 2022, threetimes as many Koreans agreed with the motivation “tobuild great wealth or very high income” over the othermotivation options. Building great wealth has been
the dominant motivation for new entrepreneurs in the
Republic of Korea since this question was introduced
by GEM in 2019.
In 2022, around a half of new entrepreneurs in the
Republic expect to use more digital technology to sell
their products in the next six months, while a third
expect to employ an additional six or more people
in five years’ time. Finally, the percentage of new
entrepreneurs with customers beyond the Republic ofKorea has been increasing slowly over the pandemic
period, from 14% in 2019 to 19% in 2022.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Ministry of SMEs and Startups

Korea Research & Institute

Korea Institute of Startup &Entrepreneurship Development(KISED)

Yongmun Kim
Team members

Contact

Myoung-jong Lee

djnom@kised.or.kr

Min-Wook Noh
Dongha Lee
Type of institution

lhj@kised.or.kr

Heeju Lim

Research InstituteWebsitewww.kised.or.kr

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report181

ECONOMY PROFILE

Romania
Q Population (2021): 19.1 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 35.4 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

46.2

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

63.8

14

It is easy to start a business

42.5

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

37

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

81.7

1

To build great wealth or very high income

74.3

12

31

To continue a family tradition

41.3

9

62.7

24

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

71.1

19

Fear of failure (opportunity)

55.7

4

Entrepreneurial intentions*

6.4

43=

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

2.0

28

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

13.7

19

Always consider social impact

88.8

7

Always consider environmental impact

85.0

13

Industry (% TEA in business services)

21.2

23

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

8.3

34=

6.5

9.9

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

8.6

14

7.1

10.1

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

33.8

32

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

43.9

23

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

38.4

38

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

63.0

6

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.6 (14/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.9 (9/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.9 (9/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.8 (11/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Romania
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.0 (11/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.5 (8/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.6 (9/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.5 (8/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.6 (14/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.7 (6/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.3 (12/16)

182

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.4 (11/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.7 (8/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe Romanian economy grew by more than 5% in
Q2 2022, but with a downturn anticipated later in theyear. The economic environment was burdened byinflationary pressures, with rising costs transmitted
into higher consumer prices by resilient demand,
especially in the food sector. Inflation, plus changes
in the Fiscal Code, have encouraged entrepreneurs toinvest in digitization and automation to reduce costs.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Romania has been improving its entrepreneurial
framework recently, with increased scores forseven of 13 Framework Conditions in the period
2021–2022, pushing Romania’s overall entrepreneurial
environment score in the National Entrepreneurial
Context Index (NECI) up to 4.2 from 4.0 a year
earlier, with a rise in Romania’s relative rank
from 40th to 36th. The largest increases were for
Entrepreneurial Education Post-School and for
Research and Development Transfers, althoughboth remain less than sufficient (<5.0), and for Easeof Entry: Market Dynamics, pushing this score into
sufficiency. Romania’s other sufficient scores are for
its Commercial and Professional Infrastructure and for
its Physical Infrastructure, suggesting that the major
obstacles to entrepreneurial development in Romania
are either financial resources (levels of, and access to,entrepreneurial finance) or are within the purview ofthe government, including both policies, programsand education.
Entrepreneurship in Romania may now be at a
crossroads, with a government that has to decide how
it prioritizes enterprise development. It is easy, but
mistaken, to regard spending on entrepreneurshipeducation and programs as a current cost rather thanas an investment in the future.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Like its neighbour Hungary, Romania has only
participated in GEM in the last two years. Also like
Hungary, Romania shares a border (much longer)

with Ukraine and can be expected to have beensignificantly impacted by events there. In addition,a third of adults in Romania reported that theirhousehold income had fallen in 2022 because of thepandemic.
Perhaps reflecting the instability of the regionalsituation, the level of TEA fell from 9.7% in 2021 to 8.3%
in 2022, although this was largely the result of sharp
fall in female entrepreneurship (down from 9.6%
to 6.5%), while male entrepreneurship actually roseslightly. Consequently, the entrepreneurial gender
gap widened substantially, with three men starting or
running a new business for every two women doing
the same in Romania in 2022.
In contrast, the level of EBO more than doubled
over the same period, from 4.1% to 8.6%, and almost
matched the level of TEA. Only 6% of Romanian
adults intended to start a business in the next three
years, down from 15% a year earlier. Nearly half ofRomanian adults knew someone who had recently
started a business, so there is no lack of role models,
while two-thirds considered they have the skills andexperience to start a business themselves, so no lackof confidence. A similar proportion saw good local
opportunities to start a business, but well over half ofthese would be deterred by fear of failure, an increase
from the previous year. This is an increasingly common
constraint on business intentions, and not just in
Romania.
“To make a difference in the world” was the
motivation agreed by most new entrepreneurs in 2022,
followed by “to build great wealth or very high income”.
A year earlier, “to earn a living because jobs are scarce”
had been the most popular motivation. As in Hungary,
the proportion of new entrepreneurs with customers
outside the country had increased in the past year,
though more modestly in Romania (from 14% to16%). However, a quarter of new entrepreneurs were
expecting to employ six or more additional people in
the next five years. Just as positively, the percentageof those starting or running a new business who
expected to use more digital technologies to sell theirproducts in the next six months increased from 28% in
2021 to 38% in 2022.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
Szabó Tünde Petra

Faculty of Economics and Business
Administration, Babes-Bolyai
University

Metro Media Transilvania

Faculty of Economics and Business
Administration, Babes-Bolyai
University

Team members

Contact

Dézsi-Benyovszki Annamária

petra.szabo@econ.ubbcluj.ro

Bálint Csaba
Györfy Lehel-Zoltán
Szász LeventeType of institution

Benedek Botond

University

Csala Dénes

Websitehttps://econ.ubbcluj.ro/Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report183

ECONOMY PROFILE

Saudi Arabia
Q Population (2021): 35.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 49.6 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

88.2

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

89.5

1

It is easy to start a business

88.7

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)% TEA

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

64.6

11

To build great wealth or very high income

87.3

1

1

To continue a family tradition

61.9

2

88.1

1

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

85.2

7

Fear of failure (opportunity)

63.3

1

Entrepreneurial intentions*

31.8

14

1

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

4.5

12

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

5.2

34

Always consider social impact

79.5

21

Always consider environmental impact

82.5

18=

Industry (% TEA in business services)

4.2

47

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

19.2

10=

16.1

21.6

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

9.7

10

10.1

9.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

47.9

24

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

15.5

48

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

62.1

12

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

67.2

2

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
7.2 (2/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
6.4 (2/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.7 (3/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.8 (2/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Saudi Arabia
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
6.9 (2/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
6.2 (4/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.1 (4/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.3 (2/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.4 (6/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.2 (7/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.9 (11/22)

184

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
4.6 (7/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.8 (5/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe outlook for Saudi Arabia’s economy is positive,
particularly if the reform process can stay on course
and investment keeps flowing into the nation’s key
initiatives and expansion areas. However, rising costs
are squeezing business margins. Government policies
have simplified the process of starting a firm andmade it simpler for foreign corporations to invest in
the economy, two factors that are essential to the
kingdom’s long-term development ambitions under
the Vision 2030.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Saudi Arabia is a clear example of an economy that
has invested heavily in its entrepreneurial environment
in recent years and seen that environments improve.
The highest-rated condition in Saudi Arabia is in
Physical Infrastructure: services and structures thatfacilitate communication, transportation and otherbusiness operations. Also highly rated are Ease of
Entry: Market Dynamics — the extent to which there
is a free and open market — and Social and Cultural
Norms that encourage acceptance, support andhigh regard for entrepreneurship. Among the lowestrated, but showing the most improvement, wasentrepreneurship education, both at primary- andsecondary-school level and in higher education andvocational training.
Compared to the average for the other 21 Level
A economies participating in GEM this year, Saudi
Arabia has higher rankings on all conditions, especially
Government Policy: Support and Relevance. Researchand Development Transfers is among the lowestrated, although close to the average for the Level A
economies. This refers to the transfer of research anddevelopment from universities and research centres tothe business sector and the degree to which engineers
and scientists can commercialize research findings.
With regard to government efforts to counter thenegative effects of COVID-19, the experts had positive
comments about government measures and policies
in general, specific programs addressing the impact
of COVID-19, support for digitalization, subsidies for
employment preservation, wage subsidies, defermentof tax liabilities, credit and loan repayment extensions,and financial support.

Institution
Lead institution
Prince Mohammed bin Salman
College (MBSC)

Type of institution
Business School
Websitehttps://www.mbsc.edu.sa
Other institutions involved
Emaar The Economic City

Babson Global Center for
Entrepreneurial Leadership (BGCEL)

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
In 2022, compared to 2020, COVID-19 had a lessnegative impact on business startup activity and thiswas especially the case in Saudi Arabia. With COVID-19
rates declining and fewer restrictions, business activity
has rebounded, and businesses had time to adapt toany lasting changes that had taken place. Additionally,a lower proportion of Established Business Owners
were perceiving constraints on growth from thepandemic, compared to 2020.
Societal attitudes are highly positive in Saudi Arabia,
with 95% or more of adults stating entrepreneurshipis a good career choice, and that entrepreneurs havehigh status and media attention. Somewhat fewer(89%) state it is easy to start a business — a highpercentage nonetheless. A similar amount (88%) know
at least one entrepreneur personally, a result thatjumped back up after low results the prior two years
which were likely due to reduced personal interaction
during the pandemic.
Nearly 90% of adults in Saudi Arabia see good
opportunities to start a business locally and believe
they have the capabilities for entrepreneurship. But
fear of failure continues to climb, reaching 57% of thoseseeing opportunities. Nonetheless, startup intentions
are high (32%) and so is TEA (19%). Contributing tothese high rates was a jump in startup activity among
the youngest age group. This is important, because
Saudi Arabia has a young population, with nearly 40%
of citizens under 25 years of age.
Most notably, EBO rates increased to 10%. This was aconcern in prior years, as EBO had hovered at around
5% or lower, among the lowest in the Level A group.
Support for entrepreneurship, and the popularity of
this, along with high and increasing startup rates,
started to materialize into mature business activity.
Most entrepreneurs in Saudi Arabia start consumerfocused businesses, accounting for 89% of TEA.
Similarly, 85% of EBO is in the consumer sector.
This is distinct among the Level A economies and isaccompanied by low participation in medium- andhigh-technology industries (less than 2% for TEA andfor EBO). This is likely to command increased attention
as the Kingdom’s 2030 vision emphasizes the creationof jobs, economic opportunities for entrepreneurs andthe diversification of the economy.
Team

Funders

Team leader

The Babson Global Center for
Entrepreneurial Leadership (BGCEL)
at MBSC

Prof. Muhammad Azam Roomi, PhD
David Abdow
Team members
Alicia Coduras
Kim Stanhouse
Donna Kelley

APS vendor
Field Interactibe-MR, Market Research
Provider, monitored by Opinometre
Institute LLS

Contact
acoduras@gemconsortium.org
mroomi@mbsc.edu.sa
kstanhouse@babson.edu

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report185

ECONOMY PROFILE

SerbiaQ Population (2021): 6.8 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 21.4 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

54.6

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

37.8

42

It is easy to start a business

32.7

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

22

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

21.6

45

To build great wealth or very high income

43.4

41

40

To continue a family tradition

22.6

37=

66.1

18

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

81.0

13

Fear of failure (opportunity)

41.3

34

Entrepreneurial intentions*

12.4

34

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.3

36=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

7.9

29

Always consider social impact

74.0

27

Always consider environmental impact

78.3

22

Industry (% TEA in business services)

13.6

34=

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

10.5

27

6.4

14.7

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

2.9

44=

1.8

4.1

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

50.2

22

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

29.4

41

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

33.1

43

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

20.3

46

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.0 (12/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.7 (10/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.3 (5/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.0 (3/16)

9
8
7
6
5

SerbiaLevel B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.1 (6/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.8 (5/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.0 (2/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.4 (9/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.0 (5/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.2 (10/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.9 (6/16)

186

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.5 (10/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
3.5 (15/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn a year characterized by the global energy crisis andthe ongoing conflict in Ukraine, Serbia experienced
a record-high level of direct foreign investments - in
2022, the amount invested by foreign companies andindividuals exceeded four billion EUR. GDP growthforecast for 2023 is between 2.5 and 3%. The inflation
rate in 2022 was over 15%. This has greatly impacted
entrepreneurs in the country as the costs of inputs
increase, including borrowing costs.
Over the past decade, the Serbian Governmenthas worked to steadily improve the entrepreneurshipecosystem, including a range of programs of the Serbia
Innovation Fund.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022 Serbia’s National Entrepreneurial Context Index(NECI) score for the overall quality of its entrepreneurial
environment was 4.6, almost exactly in the middleof the 51 GEM economies, being ranked 27th. In theassessments of its individual framework scores, Serbia
was scored by its national experts as sufficient (≥5.0)
in five conditions and insufficient in the remaining
eight. Serbia’s lowest scores were for entrepreneurial
education, both in schools and post-school, and forthe level of entrepreneurial finance. The former isan obvious opportunity for the Serbian government
to improve its entrepreneurial environment, while
the latter may encourage those Serbians startinga business to look beyond conventional sources offinance.
More positively, Serbia scored relatively well for
its Government Entrepreneurial Programs and for
its Physical Infrastructure. Both of these are goodfoundations for an entrepreneurial future. Serbia
also scored fairly highly in its experts’ assessment ofrecovery from the economic impacts of the pandemic.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
One in two adults in Serbia reported that the
pandemic had reduced their household income
in 2022, just about in the middle of the Level
B economies. Investing in someone else’s new

Institution
Lead institution
University of Novi Sad, Faculty ofTechnical Sciences

Type of institution
University
Websitehttps://www.uns.ac.rs/index.
php/en/faculties/ffaculties/
faculty-technical-sciencesbusiness was a rare activity in Serbia, undertaken byjust 3% of adults, one of the lowest levels among the
economies surveyed by GEM.
Fewer than one in eight adults in Serbia expected
to start a business in the next three years, the secondlowest rate among Level B economies, just above
Hungary, and fourth lowest of the GEM economies
behind Japan and South Africa as well. On most otherindicators, Serbia was close to the middle of the GEM
economies.
More than half of Serbian adults knew someone
who had recently started a new business, andtwo-thirds considered themselves as having the skills
and experience to do the same. A similar proportion
saw good opportunities to start a business locally,
although two in five of these would be deterred by fearof failure.
The percentage of adults starting or running a new
business in Serbia was 10.5% in 2022, although malenew entrepreneurship was higher at 14.7% and female
new entrepreneurship lower at 6.4%, meaning that
there were more than two Serbian men starting a new
business for every woman doing the same. Meanwhile,
EBO was relatively low at just under 3%, implying
a ratio of more than three people starting a new
business for every one running an established one.
Turning those new into established businesses will
be a major challenge for the Serbian entrepreneurial
environment.
Making a living because jobs are scarce was by
far the most common agreed motive among newentrepreneurs, with more than four out of five inagreement. The next highest was building great
wealth or very high income, with just two in fiveagreeing.
Fewer than one in five of Serbia’s new entrepreneurs
had customers beyond its borders, a figure thatis unlikely to improve given that just one in three
expected to use more digital technology to sell
their products in the next six months. This was thesecond lowest proportion of the Level B economies,
and seventh lowest of the 51 economies in GEM in
2022. One in eight of those starting or running a new
business in Serbia expected to employ another six ormore people in the next three years.
Team

Funders

Team leader

Government of Serbia

Ugljesa Marjanovic

European Union

Team members
Igor Graić
Bojan Lalić

World Bank

APS vendor
IPSOS

Contact
umarjano@uns.ac.rs

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report187

ECONOMY PROFILE

Slovak Republic
Q Population (2021): 5.4 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 33.0 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

59.3

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

29.4

45

It is easy to start a business

20.4

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

16

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

29.2

42

To build great wealth or very high income

36.5

49

48

To continue a family tradition

29.9

23

42.9

43

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

78.8

15

Fear of failure (opportunity)

42.9

30=

Entrepreneurial intentions*

8.6

39

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

0.7

47

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

14.0

18

Always consider social impact

71.1

34

Always consider environmental impact

70.7

34

Industry (% TEA in business services)

22.6

20

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

10.7

25=

9.5

11.9

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

6.6

24

4.0

9.1

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

56.6

19

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

9.3

49

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

34.0

42

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

32.6

38

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.2 (16/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.4 (5/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.7 (3/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.6 (6/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Slovak Republic
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.5 (9/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.9 (3/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.2 (10/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.7 (6/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.9 (11/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.7 (4/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.2 (13/16)

188

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.9 (5/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.2 (12/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe war in Ukraine and the global energy crisis
reduced economic growth in the Slovak Republic tojust under 2% in 2022, with inflation at around 16%.
Rising business costs have led to more indebtedness
and liquidity problems, contributing to pessimism thatis expected to reduce business activity.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
According to the assessments of its own national
experts, the Slovak Republic’s entrepreneurial
environment is improving slowly, but remains
fairly weak on a number of fronts. Five conditions
within the National Entrepreneurship Context
Index (NECI) were assessed as poor (score <4.0) in
2022: Government Policy: Support and Relevance,
Government Entrepreneurial Programs, Researchand Development Transfers, Social and Cultural
Norms and Entrepreneurial Education at School.
Government is influential in each of these, andcould do much more to support entrepreneurship,
encourage people to start a business and celebrate
successful entrepreneurs. While both scores of thegovernment policy conditions improved in 2022, eachis still some way from sufficiency.
Another improved area in 2022 were the two easeof entry conditions, while access to commercial andprofessional services also improved. Both educationand entrepreneurial finance experiences weremixed, with improving scores for Ease of Access toEntrepreneurial Finance, but decreasing availabilityof that finance. Similarly, assessed entrepreneurial
education in schools improved, but post-school
declined.
One consequence of these changes is that theoverall assessed quality of the entrepreneurial
environment in the Slovak Republic, as measured by its
NECI score, improved from 4.3 in 2021 (ranked 33rd) to
4.4 in 2022 (ranked 31st). One influence may have been
the Slovak Republic’s handling of the response to theeconomic effects of the pandemic, rated by its experts
as more than sufficient.

Institution
Lead institution
Comenius University in Bratislava,
Faculty of Management

Type of institution
University
Websitehttps://www.fm.uniba.sk/en
Other institutions involved
Slovak Business Agency (SBA)

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The Slovak Republic has been heavily affected by the
pandemic, with more than half of adults reportingthat the it had reduced their household income in
2022, a proportion little changed since 2020. As inmany GEM participating economies, the percentageof adults investing in someone else’s new business fellin the early days of the pandemic but has recovered
strongly, reaching one in 10 in 2022 (having been one
in eight in 2019). One influence may be the shortageof entrepreneurial finance from other sources, noted
earlier.
Business intentions also fell in those early days ofthe pandemic (from 20% in 2019 to 8% in 2021), buthave yet to recover fully, reaching just 9% in 2022. The
percentage of adults actually starting or running theirown business in the Slovak Republic more than halved
as the impacts of the pandemic deepened (from 14%
in 2020 to 6% in 2021), but has since increased to 11%,despite events next door in Ukraine. In the process, theabsolute entrepreneurial gender gap has fallen, fromsix percentage points in 2019 to just two in 2022. The
level of EBO has been more stable, increasing slightly
at the start of the pandemic and hovering at around
6.5% since.
Social perceptions in the Slovak Republic presented
a mixed picture in 2022, with six in 10 knowing
someone who has recently started a business, fourin 10 agreeing they have the skills and experienceto start their own, but just three in 10 seeing good
opportunities to start a business locally.
“To earn a living because jobs are scarce” hasbeen by far the dominant agreed motivation for new
entrepreneurs in the Slovak Republic since thesequestions were introduced by GEM in 2019, with fourout of five agreeing in 2022. Agreement with the
motivation “to make a difference in the world” hasdeclined from four out of 10 new entrepreneurs in 2019
to three out of 10 in 2022.
In the year to 2022, the proportion of those startingor running a new business who, in the next six months,
intend to use more digital technology to sell theirproducts doubled, from one in six to one in three.
However, the percentage of new entrepreneurs who
expect to employ another six or more people in five
years’ time has fallen sharply, from 29% in 2020 to just
6% in 2022.
Team

Funders

Team leader

Slovak Business Agency (SBA)

Prof. Ing. Anna Pilková, PhD, MBA

Comenius University in Bratislava,
Faculty of Management

Team members
Assoc. Prof. Marian Holienka, PhD
RNDr. Zuzana Kovačičová, PhD
Mgr. Juraj Mikuš, PhD

APS vendor
Actly s. r. o.

Mgr. Ján Rehák, PhD

Contact
anna.pilkova@fm.uniba.sk

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report189ECONOMY PROFILE

Slovenia
Q Population (2021): 2.1 million (IMF)
Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 43.6 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

53.5

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

55.0

26

It is easy to start a business

67.7

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

24

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

50.2

22

To build great wealth or very high income

57.0

24

9=

To continue a family tradition

29.8

24

62.8

22=

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

57.4

36

Fear of failure (opportunity)

50.2

13

Entrepreneurial intentions*

15.3

27

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.3

36=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

24.0

5

Always consider social impact

83.4

17

Always consider environmental impact

93.0

3

Industry (% TEA in business services)

35.7

7

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

8.0

37

5.6

10.3

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

8.1

18

6.2

9.8

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

24.9

44

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

21.9

47

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

52.4

25

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

48.5

21

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.9 (18/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.9 (14/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.6 (17/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.4 (15/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Slovenia
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.4 (15/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.6 (19/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.3 (20/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
6.0 (5/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.8 (12/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.4 (17/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.1 (18/22)

190

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.0 (15/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.6 (18/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
Economic growth reached 5% in Slovenia in 2022, but
was expected to slow in 2023. Employment continued
to increase, and unemployment fell, while inflation was
expected to touch 10% by the end of 2022.
Economic recovery from the pandemic has
combined with higher energy costs to push up prices,
although some of the effects on inflation have been
mitigated by government actions to reduce taxes
on electricity and energy products. Entrepreneurs
face shortages of labour, putting upward pressure on
wages. Confidence indicators have declined following
the war in Ukraine.
In March 2022, an amendment to the Investment
Promotion Act came into effect to help businesses
adapt to the demands of the green transformation
without losing international competitiveness. The law
also provides incentives for investment in research,development and innovation.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Like its neighbours Croatia and Hungary, Slovenia
has been gradually improving its entrepreneurial
environment. While it still had a large number ofFramework Conditions regarded by its national
experts as insufficient (<5.0) (nine in 2022, the sameas in 2021), many of those conditions had moved a lot
closer to sufficiency by 2022. The ratings by national
experts improved for 11 of the 13 Entrepreneurial
Framework Conditions in 2022, with one unchanged
and one declining (Commercial and Professional
Infrastructure, and not by much). In 2021, fiveconditions scored as much less than sufficient (>4.0).
By 2022 this fell to just two. The biggest improvements
were for Ease of Access to Entrepreneurial Finance,
Entrepreneurial Education at School, Social andCultural Norms and Government Entrepreneurial
Programs.
One consequence of all these changes is that theoverall National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI)
score for Slovenia’s entrepreneurial environment
improved from 4.3 in 2021, when Slovenia had ranked
32nd of the GEM economies, to 4.8 in 2022, or 23rd. For
the individual Framework Conditions, Slovenia’s best
rank in 2022 was for Ease of Access to Entrepreneurial

Finance (14th of the 51 GEM economies), while thelowest was 43rd for Social and Cultural Norms.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The percentage of adults in Slovenia reporting that the
pandemic reduced household income continues to fall:from 45% in 2020, to 34% a year later and to 25% in 2022.
Under one in five adults intend to start a business inthe next three years. While this share had fallen at theonset of the pandemic, it since recovered strongly, andwas only slightly lower in 2022 than in 2019.
More than half of adults in Slovenia knew anentrepreneur, or saw good opportunities to start abusiness locally, although half of the latter would bedeterred by fear of failure. Confidence in one’s own
abilities was high, with three out of five adults agreeing
they had the skills or experience to start a businessthemselves.
Both the percentage of adults starting and runninga new business, and of those running an establishedbusiness, fell slightly at the start of the pandemic but
had largely recovered, the former from 7.8% in 2019and 6.0% in 2020 to 8.0% in 2022, and the latter from
8.5% in 2019 and 7.0% in 2020 to 8.1% in 2022. Men weremore likely than women to be starting a business inSlovenia in 2022, with around seven men starting a
new business for every four women doing the same.
Each of the three motives “to earn a living because
jobs are scarce”, “to build great wealth or very highincome” and “to make a difference in the world”, wereagreed by just over half of all new entrepreneurs
in Slovenia in 2022. Meanwhile, the share of new
entrepreneurs with customers beyond Slovenia wasboth relatively high and rising: from one in three in2020 to just under one-half in 2022.
However, job expectations among newentrepreneurs have been declining. In 2020, 30% of
those starting or running a new business had expected
to employ another six people or more in five years’
time. One year later this had fallen to 22% and thenfell further to 17% in 2022. More optimistically, morethan a half of new entrepreneurs expect to use moredigital technology to sell their products in the next six
months.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
Prof. Karin Širec, PhD
Team members

SPIRIT Slovenia — Public
Agency for Entrepreneurship,
Internationalization, Foreign
Investments and Technology

Mediana

University of Maribor, Faculty of
Economics and BusinessProf. Polona Tominc, PhD

Slovenian Research Agency

Prof. Katja Crnogaj, PhD

Institute for Entrepreneurship andSmall Business Management at
Faculty of Economics & Business,
University of Maribor

Prof. Barbara Bradač Hojnik, PhD
Type of institution
University

Matej Rus, MSc

Contact
karin.sirec@um.si

Prof. Emeritus Miroslav Rebernik, PhD

Websitehttps://www.um.si/en
https://www.epf.um.si/en/
https://ipmmp.um.si/
globalni-podjetniski-monitor/

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report191

ECONOMY PROFILESouth Africa
Q Population (2021): 60.0 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 14.4 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

33.6

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

61.3

20

It is easy to start a business

63.9

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)% TEA

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

80.4

4

To build great wealth or very high income

80.8

6

16

To continue a family tradition

49.2

6

63.7

20

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

89.5

3

Fear of failure (opportunity)

59.4

2

Entrepreneurial intentions*

6.0

45

45

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.8

29

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

21.3

10=

Always consider social impact

83.0

18

Always consider environmental impact

75.5

29

Industry (% TEA in business services)

7.9

40

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

8.5

33

7.9

9.1

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

1.8

48

1.7

2.0

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

63.7

14

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

57.8

9

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

45.1

35

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

58.9

9

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.5 (9/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.0 (6/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.8 (6/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
4.9 (9/13)

9
8
7
6
5

South Africa
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.1 (8/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.6 (8/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.9 (6/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.8 (8/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.8 (7/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.6 (9/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.3 (5/13)

192

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.6 (4/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.5 (7/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPGDP for the South African economy was expected
to grow by around 2% in 2022. This is too low to havemuch impact on the national unemployment rate ofalmost 33%, among the highest globally.
Inflation was high at nearly 7% and the cost of
borrowing was becoming prohibitive for many
startups and growing businesses. The government
has approved the National Integrated SmallEnterprise Development (NISED) strategic framework,
strengthening support for small and medium-sizedenterprises

2022 Framework Conditions Review
South Africa showed year-on-year improvements
on 10 of the 13 framework conditions, including
the three conditions directly dependent on
government: Government Policy: Support andRelevance, Government Policy: Taxes and Bureaucracy
and Government Entrepreneurial Programs.
Just as importantly, both the level and access toentrepreneurial finance also improved. As a result,South Africa’s overall score for its entrepreneurial
environment in the National Entrepreneurship
Context Index (NECI) increased from 3.7 in 2021 to 4.1
in 2022, lifting it from 45th to 40th overall. However,South Africa was just one of three economies in
2022, alongside Togo and Tunisia, with all Framework
Conditions scored as insufficient (<5.0), although,in the case of South Africa, at least two (PhysicalInfrastructure and Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics) are
edging closer to sufficiency.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The early stages of the pandemic saw a substantial
increase in the proportion of adults starting or runninga new business in South Africa, up from 11% in 2019 to

17% in 2021, before falling back to 8% in 2022. Similar
volatility was seen in business intentions, with 12%of adults intending to start a business in the next
three years in 2019, rising to 20% in 2021, then fallingback to 6% in 2022. EBO was 3.5% in 2019, went up to
5.2% in 2021, and then fell further to 1.8% in 2022. This
entrepreneurial instability, of course, mirrors the wider
economy. More than three in five South Africans reportthat their household income has fallen in 2022 becauseof the pandemic.
Just over a third of South Africans know someone
who has recently started a business, while twice thislevel consider they have the skills and experience torun their own business. More than three in five seegood opportunities to start a business, althoughmore than half of these would be deterred by fear of
failure.
In South Africa, men are slightly more likely than
women to be starting a new business, although theentrepreneurial gender gap remains small. However,job expectations continue to decline: in 2019 three in 10of those starting or running a new business expected
to employ another six or more people in the next five
years, but by 2022 this share had fallen to just two in
10. Not surprisingly, earning a living because jobs are
scarce continues to be the dominant agreed motive
in an economy in which 97% of new businesses have
local customers, although almost a quarter also havecustomers outside of South Africa, up from less than afifth in 2021.
More than four out of five new entrepreneurs inSouth Africa agreed with the motivation to starta business in order “to earn a living because jobs
are scarce”, while almost as many agreed with the
motivations “to make a difference in the world” and“to build great wealth or very high income”. Clearly, forSouth African entrepreneurs, these motivations are notexclusive.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Stellenbosch Business School

NielsenIQ South Africa

Stellenbosch University

Angus Bowmaker-Falconer

Small Enterprise Development
Agency (Seda)

Team members
Prof. Marius Ungerer

Standard Bank of South Africa
LimitedProf. Natanya Meyer
Type of institution

Contact
abf@sun.ac.za

Dr. Mike Herrington

University
Websitehttp://www.sun.ac.za/
Other institutions involved
University of Johannesburg

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report193

ECONOMY PROFILESpain
Q Population (2021): 47.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 40.8 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

41.3

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

26.0

48

It is easy to start a business

32.2

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

39=

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

39.3

34

To build great wealth or very high income

39.1

45

41

To continue a family tradition

21.4

41

46.5

42

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

70.6

20

Fear of failure (opportunity)

50.9

10=

Entrepreneurial intentions*

8.3

40=

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

0.6

48

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

12.0

22

Always consider social impact

68.5

39

Always consider environmental impact

68.9

37

Industry (% TEA in business services)

38.5

5

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

6.0

44=

5.9

6.0

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

7.0

20

6.5

7.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

40.2

29

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

53.1

14

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

46.5

30

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

40.3

28

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.3 (21/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.8 (21/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.9 (22/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
6.4 (16/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Spain
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
2.9 (22/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.1 (21/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.3 (22/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.2 (17/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.2 (19/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.2 (18/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.4 (22/22)

194

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.8 (18/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.1 (11/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPIn 2021, GDP in Spain grew by more than 5%, while
employment growth was nearly 7%. Inflation was
below the Eurozone average at 6.6%, increasing thecompetitiveness of startups in Spain. In 2022, theSpanish government approved new laws to support
business creation and growth and to promote thestartup ecosystem.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2021 the overall entrepreneurial environment in
Spain, as measured by the National Entrepreneurship
Context Index (NECI), had scored 5.4, placing it 10thout of 47 economies, with 10 Framework Conditions
scored as sufficient or better (≥5.0) and just three
as insufficient (and two of those were very close to
sufficient). Just one year later, the entrepreneurial
environment in Spain had suffered a cataclysmic
collapse, leaving it with a score of 4.0 and a rank of
41st of 51 economies. Ten Framework Conditions wereassessed as insufficient and just three as sufficient or
better.
All of Spain’s Framework Condition scores in 2022
were lower compared to 2021, with falls in scores for
Government Policy: Support and Relevance (5.4 to 2.9),
Government Entrepreneurial Programs (6.3 to 4.2),
Research and Development Transfers (5.6 to 3.4) and
Government Policy: Taxes and Bureaucracy (5.1 to 3.3).
Urgent action to support new businesses isrequired if further falls are to be prevented. A new legal
framework that supports startup creation has beendeveloped in 2022, which includes measures to reduce
entry costs and favour the attraction of personnel
and foreign investment. These measures come into
effect in 2023 and should improve perceptions of theentrepreneurial environment in Spain.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Spain continues to have the largest Adult Population
Survey (APS) sample size of any GEM participating
economy, allowing its national and regional teams to
conduct analysis at a fine level of detail. Because of thisInstitution

Regional teams

Lead institution

José Ruiz Navarro, Phd, Director
GEM Andalucía; Lucio Fuentelsaz
Lamata, PhD, Co-Director GEM
Aragón; Consuelo González Gil, PhD,
Co-Director GEM Aragón; ManuelGonzález Díaz, Phd, Director GEM
Asturias; Ana Fernández Laviada,
Phd, Director GEM Cantabria; Juan
José Jiménez Moreno, Phd, Director
GEM Castilla La Mancha; Nuria
González Álvarez, Phd, Director GEM
Castilla y León; Carlos Guallarte
Núñez, Phd, Director GEM Cataluña;
Gabriel García-Parada Arias, Phd,
Director GEM Ceuta; José María
Gómez Gras, Phd, Director GEM
Comunidad Valenciana; Antonio
Fernández Portillo, Phd, Director
GEM Extremadura; Loreto Fernández
Fernández, Phd, Director GEM Galicia;
Julio Batle Lorente, Phd, Director

Observatorio del Emprendimiento de
España (OEE)

Type of institution
Non Profit Organisation
Websitehttp://www.gem-spain.com

sample size, even small changes in variables may besignificant.
The percentage of adults in Spain intending to starta business in the next three years fell slightly in the firstyear of the pandemic and has been rising steadily sincethen, although the level in 2022 (8.3%), was half of its
largest neighbour, France. This is despite the collapse
in the entrepreneurial environment outlined above.
Two out of five adults in Spain consider they have theskills and experience to start a business, with a similar
proportion knowing someone who had already doneso. However, just one in four see good opportunities tostart a business locally, while more than half of thesewould be deterred from doing so by the fear of failure.
The upshot of all this was that just 6% of adultsin Spain were starting or running a new business in
2022, a proportion that has hardly changed in thepast five years. There was hardly any entrepreneurial
gender gap in Spain in 2022, with proportions of men
and women starting new businesses virtually thesame. However, this is significantly less than France
next door. The level of EBO in Spain has also proved
remarkably stable at 7% in 2022, slightly higher thanthe pre-pandemic level of 6.3% in 2019 (and more than
twice the level of its neighbour!).
Nearly two in five adults in Spain reported that theirhousehold income had fallen due to the pandemic.
Since that pandemic started, “to earn a living because
jobs are scarce” has been by far the dominant motive,
agreed by seven out of 10 new entrepreneurs, almost
twice the level of agreement of the next highest
motive (“to build great wealth or very high income”).
Two in five entrepreneurs agreed with the motive “tomake a difference in the world”, and just one in fivewith “to continue a family tradition”.
Despite its relatively low level, starting or running a
new business in Spain offers considerable potential interms of impact. Almost a third of new entrepreneurs
had customers outside of Spain, while nearly a half
expected to use more digital technologies in thenext six months to sell their products, a much higher
proportion than in France. However just one in 10
new entrepreneurs expected to employ six or more
additional people in the next five years.

GEM Islas Baleares; Rosa María
Batista Canino, Phd, Director GEM
Islas Canarias; Luis Ruano Marrón,
Phd, Director GEM La Rioja; MiguelAngoitia Grijalba, Phd, Director GEM
Madrid; Mª del Mar Fuentes Fuentes,
Phd, Director GEM Melilla; Alicia
Rubio Bañón, Phd, Director GEM
Murcia; Ignacio Contín Pilart, Phd,
Co-Director GEM Navarra; Martín
Larraza Quintana, Phd, Co-Director
GEM Navarra; María Saiz Santos, Phd,
Director GEM País Vasco

Mª del Mar Fuentes Fuentes, PhD

National teamOpinometre

Team leader

Contact

Ana Fernández Laviada, PhD
National team members
Nuria Calvo Babío, PhD

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Ignacio Mira Solves, PhD
María Saiz Santos, PhD
Paula San Martín Espina, PhD

Funders
ENISA (Ministry of Industry,
Commerce and Tourism)

APS vendor

presidencia@gem-spain.com
secretaria@gem-spain.com

195ECONOMY PROFILE

SwedenQ Population (2021): 10.4 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 59.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

53.8

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

76.7

5

It is easy to start a business

79.8

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

24

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

44.0

29

To build great wealth or very high income

52.1

29

4

To continue a family tradition

16.3

46

49.4

38

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

24.9

49

Fear of failure (opportunity)

41.5

33

Entrepreneurial intentions*

13.7

32

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

1.3

36=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

19.4

13

Always consider social impact

60.0

45

Always consider environmental impact

60.8

44

Industry (% TEA in business services)

33.1

12

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

9.1

30=

7.1

11.0

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

4.8

35

3.4

6.1

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

22.0

47

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

23.7

46

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

36.5

41

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

33.4

37

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.3 (12/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.8 (6/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.2 (9/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.1 (10/22)

9
8
7
6
5

SwedenLevel A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.1 (19/22)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.4 (20/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.9 (15/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.4 (10/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.7 (17/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.6 (14/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.3 (15/22)

196

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
4.5 (9/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.1 (21/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe Swedish economy is estimated to have grownby about 3% in 2022, although high inflation (8%),
higher interest rates and increased pessimism
among households and firms were expected to leadto a slowdown in 2023. Inflation has led to higher
interest rates, reducing demand and creating a morechallenging climate for both new and establishedbusinesses.
Favourable tax rules for employee stock options
have been extended to young growth companies tohelp them to recruit and retain staff.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In recent years Sweden had improved its
entrepreneurial environment, having had an overall
National Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI) score
for the quality of that environment of 4.5 (less thansufficient; <5.0) in 2020, ranked 23rd, and then rising
to a well-sufficient score of 5.3 (12th) in 2021. This
momentum faltered in 2022, with eight Framework
Condition scores being lower than a year earlier,reducing Sweden’s overall score to 5.0, or to justsufficient, with a ranking of 19th. The largest fall
was in Commercial and Professional Infrastructure;
followed by Research and Development Transfers;
Entrepreneurial Finance; and Government Policy:
Support and Relevance. For an economy ranked
among the top 10 in terms of average incomes,
resources should not be an issue.
Take Entrepreneurial Education Post-School, forexample. The score for this Framework Conditionin 2022 was 4.1, down from a year earlier, and muchless than sufficient. However, other economies haveinvested in and improved their post-school education,
so that Sweden’s relative position in terms of physicalinfrastructure fell to 41st of the 51 economies in 2022,
having been 22nd just three years earlier.
Sweden did score relatively highly in the newquestions about COVID recovery, a result consistent
with its improving Framework Condition score formarket dynamics. But there is clearly much work to
do elsewhere in improving Sweden’s entrepreneurial
environment to a level compatible with her Level A
status.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Around one in eight adults in Sweden invested insomeone else’s new business in 2022, a proportion
that has been both relatively high and relatively stable
over the past few years. However, the proportion of
adults intending to start a business fell at the start ofthe pandemic (from 15% in 2019 to 11% in 2020), but
has since recovered, reaching 15% in 2021 but 14% in
2022. Swedish women remain less likely to be startinga new business than Swedish men, although thegender gap has narrowed in recent years as female
entrepreneurship has risen faster than male. EBO
actually increased at the start of the pandemic, but has
subsequently stabilized at 4.8%, more or less what it
was before the pandemic.
In 2022 more than half of Swedish adults knew
someone who has started a business recently, witha similar proportion agreeing they have the skills
and experience to do so. A relatively high proportion(more three in four) saw good opportunities to start abusiness locally, although nearly half of these would bedeterred by fear of failure.
“To build great wealth or very high income” hasbeen the most commonly chosen motivation of new
entrepreneurs since this question was introduced by
GEM in 2019, while the proportions agreeing with the
motivation of “to continue a family tradition” or “toearn a living because jobs are scarce” have both fallen
continuously since then.
The pandemic may have encouraged newentrepreneurs to focus more on local markets. The
proportion with customers outside of the country
declined from 46% in 2019 to 30% in 2021, before
some slight recovery in 2022 (to 36%). This may haveinfluenced more than a third of new entrepreneurs
who expected to use more digital technology to sell
their products in the next six months. Optimistically,
the proportion of new entrepreneurs expecting toemploy six or more additional people in five years
stood at 15% in 2022, up sharply from just 9% a year
earlier.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Confederation of Swedish Enterprise

NorstatSwedish Entrepreneurship Forum(Entreprenörskapsforum)

Per Thulin

Triton Advisers Sweden

Team members
Marcus Kardelo
Martin Svensson

Type of institution
Research InstituteContact
marcus.kardelo@entreprenorskapsforum.seAnders Broström
Frans Prenkert

Websitehttps://entreprenorskapsforum.se

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report197

ECONOMY PROFILE

Switzerland
Q Population (2021): 8.7 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 77.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

52.1

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

47.0

34

It is easy to start a business

66.5

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

27

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

57.4

14

To build great wealth or very high income

37.1

47

12

To continue a family tradition

11.2

48

47.6

41

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

47.1

40

Fear of failure (opportunity)

32.3

47

Entrepreneurial intentions*

10.5

37

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

0.8

46

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

14.8

17

Always consider social impact

71.4

31=

Always consider environmental impact

75.3

30

Industry (% TEA in business services)

38.4

6

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

7.4

38

6.3

8.4

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

8.2

17

8.0

8.4

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

22.9

46

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

28.8

42

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

31.9

45

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

36.4

32

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.5 (10/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
6.4 (3/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.6 (4/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.8 (1/22)

9
8
7
6
5

Switzerland
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
5.5 (8/22)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
5.8 (5/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.2 (3/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
3.8 (18/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.5 (5/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.7 (2/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
6.0 (3/22)

198

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.6 (11/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.7 (6/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPSwiss GDP grew very little in the second and third
quarters of 2022 (0.2% and 0.1% respectively). The
services sector drove the little growth there was.
So far, Switzerland has avoided high inflation, with
consumer prices rising around 3% in 2022. However,some entrepreneurship has been impacted by therising costs of imported goods and services. In 2022,
the Swiss Innovation Agency launched “Innosuisse”, an
initiative to support science-based innovation projects
with significant market potential.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In pre-pandemic 2019, Switzerland topped the then
new league table of entrepreneurial framework overall
scores in the National Entrepreneurship Context Index(NECI) with a score of 6.1. The pandemic period saw
some deterioration in that score to 5.4 (10th) in 2020,
and to 5.5 in 2021 (ninth). But 2022 marked somethingof a recovery in Switzerland’s overall score: to 5.8.
Improvements in the entrepreneurial environmentscores of other economies, however, meant that
Switzerland only ranked eighth of the 51 GEM
economies in 2022.
In the 2021–2022 period, Switzerland increased
its scores in nine Framework Conditions, with
Entrepreneurial Education Post-School accounting
for the largest increase. However, despite a creditable
COVID recovery score of 6.5, well sufficient and 10thof 51 economies, Switzerland continues to haveits overall score dragged down by poor scores for
Entrepreneurial Education at School and for Easeof Entry: Market Dynamics. In the latter Framework
Condition, Switzerland ranked 45th of 51 economies,
in stark contrast to the 10 Framework Conditions
for which it ranked 10th or better. In an economy inwhich six Framework Conditions scored 6 or more,scoring 3.8 for Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics and3.6 for Entrepreneurial Education at School is bothproblematic and inconsistent.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Like its similarly high-income neighbours Austria,
France and Germany (but not Italy), Switzerland has areputation for high levels of quality entrepreneurship.
However, that reputation may be at risk, with thepercentage of adults starting or running a new
business in Switzerland falling in 2022 to 7.4%,
down from 9.8% a year earlier, which in turn had
been comparable to the pre-pandemic level of
2019. However the level of EBO, which had fallen
precipitously at the start of the pandemic (from 12% in2019 to 7% in 2020), continues to recover, reaching justover 8% in 2022.
Just over one in ten Swiss adults intend to starta business in the next three years, nearly back to
pre-pandemic levels, while one in 10 are investingin someone else’s new business. More than halfof Swiss adults know someone who has recently
started a business, with only slightly less seeing good
opportunities to start a business locally, or considering
they have the skills and experience to be able to do so.
Less than a third of those seeing good opportunities
would be deterred by fear of failure.
“To make a difference in the world” remains themost agreed motivation for new Swiss entrepreneurs,
as it has been since these questions were introduced
by GEM in 2019, apart from the immediate aftermathof the pandemic (2020), when it was temporarily
overtaken by “to earn a living because jobs are scarce”.
In 2022, almost three in five new Swiss entrepreneurs
agreed with the motivation “to make a difference inthe world”.
While one in three new entrepreneurs expected
to use more digital technology to sell their productsin the next six months, just one in 10 of those newentrepreneurs were expecting to employ another six ormore people in five years’ time.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
Prof. Rico Baldegger, PhD

School of Management Fribourg(HEG-FR)

Gfs Bern

School of Management Fribourg(HEG-FR)

University of Applied Sciences andArts of Western Switzerland (HES-SO)

Contact

Team members
Assoc. Prof. Raphael Gaudart
Assoc. Prof. Pascal Wild

Type of institution
Business School

Rico.baldegger@hefr.ch

Gabriel Simonet, MSc BA
Lucia Zurkinden, MSc BA

Websitehttps://www.heg-fr.ch/en
Other institutions involved
Swiss Start-up Factory
Swiss Economic Forum
Impact Hub Switzerland

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report199

ECONOMY PROFILE

TaiwanQ Population (2021): 23.9 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 34.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

29.0

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

46.8

35=

It is easy to start a business

40.5

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

47

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

53.6

18

To build great wealth or very high income

49.5

31

33

To continue a family tradition

24.0

33=

39.9

45

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

30.8

46

Fear of failure (opportunity)

42.9

30=

Entrepreneurial intentions*

15.2

28

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

2.1

26=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

8.6

28

Always consider social impact

90.9

2=

Always consider environmental impact

87.4

10

Industry (% TEA in business services)

13.6

34=

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

5.6

46

4.3

6.9

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

9.0

12=

5.0

13.0

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

44.2

27

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

39.5

29

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

57.8

16

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

41.9

27

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
6.7 (1/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
5.9 (1/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.4 (1/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
8.4 (1/16)

9
8
7
6
5

TaiwanLevel B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
6.6 (1/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
5.2 (2/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
7.1 (1/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.9 (5/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
6.6 (1/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.9 (1/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
5.8 (1/16)

200

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
4.3 (2/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.9 (1/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPInflation has impacted the global economy and thisis certainly the case for Taiwan. GDP growth in theeconomy has slowed to 3%, lower than earlier forecasts.
The consumer price index edged up to about 3%, while
unemployment remains low at 3.6%.
Entrepreneurs in Taiwan have become morecautious due to rising prices. Nevertheless, the level of
incubation activities remain quite high, demonstratingthat many individuals are proactively looking foropportunities to take the next step in starting abusiness.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
It is easy for governments to argue that they don’t haveenough resources to afford an excellent environment
for entrepreneurship. It certainly is the case thatsome rich economies have invested heavily in theirentrepreneurial environments in recent years and haveseen their environments improve. But it is also the casethat some relatively low- or middle-income economies
have achieved excellence in their environments, andthis Global Report outlines two obvious examples:
Taiwan and India. High-income economies withgovernments that have presided over sharp declines
in their entrepreneurial environments, including Spainand Italy, may care to take note. The quality of theirentrepreneurial environment is as much about choice
as it is about resources.
In 2022, the quality of the entrepreneurial
environment in Level B Taiwan was assessed by its
national experts, in terms of National Entrepreneurship
Context Index (NECI) score, at 6.2, third among the 51
GEM economies, just as it had been two years earlier
with a NECI score of 6.1. Taiwan did not participate
in the GEM National Expert Survey (NES) in 2021, so
comparisons will be made with results for 2020. In both2020 and 2022, the only Framework Condition scoring
as insufficient (<5.0) was Entrepreneurial Education
at School, with the score actually dipping between
the two years. However, entrepreneurship courses
and programs were only recently added into tertiary
education in Taiwan in recent years, and the effects ofthis will take time.
On all other Framework Conditions, Taiwan scoredsufficiently, and usually as much better than this.
In 2022, Taiwan had 10 of its Framework Conditions
scored among the top 10 of the 51 GEM economies,
with three conditions ranked first: Government Policy:

Taxes and Bureaucracy, Commercial and Professional
Infrastructure, and Physical Infrastructure. The biggest
improvement since 2020 was for Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy. If Taiwan can approach
improving entrepreneurial education in schools
with the same commitment given to improving
government entrepreneurial policy, then quality could
permeate its entire entrepreneurial landscape.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Just over two in five Taiwanese adults reported that
their household income in 2022 was lower becauseof the pandemic, up slightly from two years earlier.
The percentage of adults investing in someone else’s
new business was both low and stable, at around 6%,
possibly because high-quality entrepreneurial financeis available elsewhere in Taiwan. Business intentions arealso stable and relatively modest around 15% since 2019.
Less than three in 10 adults in Taiwan in 2022 knew
someone who had recently started their own business,down slightly from one in three in 2020. Almost two infive adults agreed they have the skills and experienceto start their own business, and nearly half saw good
opportunities to do so locally, although two in five of
these would be deterred by the fear of failure.
The rate of adults starting or running a new
business was stable at 8.4% in both 2019 and 2020, but
had since fallen to 5.6% in 2022. Men were more likely
than women to start a new business in Taiwan, witharound three new businesses started by men for every
two started by women. EBO has followed a similar
pattern to new starts, falling from 12.8% in 2019 to 9%
in 2022. So, in Taiwan, the proportion of adults startingor running a new business was about two-thirds of the
proportion running an established business.
“To make a difference in the world” was the mostcommonly agreed motivation for new entrepreneurs in
Taiwan, at just over one in two, closely followed by “tobuild great wealth or very high income”, at just under
one in two. The proportion of new entrepreneurs withcustomers beyond Taiwan was 27% in 2022, back to thepre-pandemic level of 2018, but below the level of 2020.
More than half of new entrepreneurs in Taiwan
expected, in the next six months, to use more digitaltechnology to sell their products, and job expectations
were strong, with more than one in three expecting toemploy an additional six people or more in five years’
time, up from one in four in 2020.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Taiwan Institute of Economic
Research (TIER)

Xin-Wu Lin

Small and Medium Enterprise
Administration, Ministry of Economic
Affairs of Taiwan

China Credit Information Service, Ltd(CRIF_CCIS)Team members
Jia-Jing Lin
Hsiang-Chih Hwang

Contact
Xin-WuLin@tier.org.tw

Type of institution
Research InstituteWebsitehttps://english.tier.org.tw/

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report201

ECONOMY PROFILETogo
Q Population (2021): 8.5 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 2.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

58.9

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

77.2

4

It is easy to start a business

54.3

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)% TEA

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

52.4

20

To build great wealth or very high income

83.3

3

20

To continue a family tradition

30.3

22

87.5

2

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

81.3

12

Fear of failure (opportunity)

40.6

37

Entrepreneurial intentions*

52.3

3

18

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

4.0

13=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

9.1

27

Always consider social impact

75.4

24

Always consider environmental impact

70.4

35

Industry (% TEA in business services)

3.3

48

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

24.1

7

25.4

22.6

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

18.0

2

18.9

17.0

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

88.0

1

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

75.4

2

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

32.4

44

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

18.1

47

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.0 (12/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
2.7 (12/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
2.8 (12/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
4.3 (12/13)

9
8
7
6
5

Togo
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
4.7 (5/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.4 (10/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.3 (5/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.1 (12/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.6 (5/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.1 (11/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.6 (11/13)

202

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
1.5 (13/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
3.6 (12/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe economy of Togo has been recovering strongly
after the pandemic, with GDP forecast to have risen
by about 6% in 2022. Although inflation increased
to around 9%, unemployment has remained stable,suggesting some economic resilience. However, thecosts of business essentials have been increasing evenfaster, with a 13% increase in water, gas, electricity andother fuel prices, and a 17% increase in transport costs(both to November 2022).
The government has acted to support businesses,with measures including rescheduling credit
payments, reducing the tax burden on business,
exempting traders and artisans for market ticket taxes
and reducing interest rates for businesses borrowing
from the National Fund for Inclusive Finance (FNFI).

2022 Framework Conditions Review
Togo last participated in GEM in 2020, so its
participation in 2022 allows some comparisons. In theearlier year, the overall quality of Togo’s entrepreneurial
environment, as measured by the National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI), scored 3.8,
placing it 38th of the 44 participating economies. In
2022, that NECI score fell to 3.6, placing Togo 49th of
the 51 GEM participating economies.
Between 2020 and 2022, all but one of Togo’s
Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions showeda change in quality assessment. Five conditions
improved, while six experienced declines. The biggest
increase was for Social and Cultural Norms, althoughthat increase was matched by equivalent falls in scoresfor both Commercial and Professional Infrastructureand for Ease of Entry: Burdens and Regulation.
The Togolese government is clearly trying to
make the best of its limited resources. Togo’s
highest framework scores in 2022 were for the two
government policy conditions and for Government
Entrepreneurial Programs. However, already lowscores for the two education conditions declined still
further between 2020 and 2022, with Togo ranked asbottom of all 51 economies for the former and 48th forthe latter.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Around nine in 10 adults in Togo reported that theirhousehold income reduced due to the pandemic
in 2022, the highest level in all GEM participating
economies. Possibly because of this, or perhaps
reflecting poor access to alternative entrepreneurial
funding, around one in eight Togolese adults invested
in someone else’s new business in both 2020 and 2022.
Entrepreneurial self-confidence was sky-highin Togo in 2022, with almost nine out of 10 adults
considering themselves to have the skills andexperience to start their own business and over a halfof adults expecting to start their own business in thenext three years. A similar proportion knew someone
who has started their own business recently. Morethan three-quarters saw good opportunities to starta business locally, although two in five of these would
not do so because of the fear of failure.
In 2020, almost a third of adults in Togo (33%)
were starting or running their own business. By
2022 this had fallen to just under a quarter (24.1%),
with male entrepreneurship falling less than female
entrepreneurship. This means that both the relative
and absolute entrepreneurial gender gaps in Togo had
fallen: by 2022, there were 11 women starting a new
business in Togo for every 10 men doing the same. The
level of EBO has been much more stable at 18% in both2020 and 2022.
The two material motivations (“to build great wealthor very high income” and “to earn a living because
jobs are scarce”) had the highest levels of agreement
among new entrepreneurs in Togo, although one in
two also agreed with the “to make a difference i theworld” motive and one in three with “to continue afamily tradition”. Many Togolese new entrepreneurs
clearly have multiple motivations in starting their new
businesses.
Around one-third of Togo’s new entrepreneurs
expected to use more digital technology in the next
six months to sell their products. Relatively few (16%)
had customers beyond Togo, while a similar proportion
expected to employ another six or more people in five
years’ time.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Coalition Nationale Pour L’Emploi Des
Jeunes (CNEJ)

Eric M. Tamandja

Coalition Nationale Pour L’Emploi Des
Jeunes (CNEJ)

Centre autonome d’études et derenforcement des capacités pour ledéveloppement au Togo (CADERDT)

WebsiteGnassingbe-E Odilia B.

https://jeunestogolais.tg/

Team members
Kola Koboyo
Abalo-Koboyo Padakale

Contact
tamandja@gmail.com

Ayao Kokou-Maduvo
Korku Kofi Soweto
Abdel Adhime A. A. Salami
Junien Roxan Nze Biyoghe
Koulalo Kodjo
Amewokunu Yao A.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report203

ECONOMY PROFILE

Tunisia
Q Population (2021): 11.9 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 11.6 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

66.6

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

61.8

18

It is easy to start a business

44.7

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

7

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

31.8

40

To build great wealth or very high income

56.2

26

30

To continue a family tradition

33.3

17

78.6

4

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

89.7

2

Fear of failure (opportunity)

42.6

32

Entrepreneurial intentions*

50.7

4

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

3.7

15

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

6.4

32

Always consider social impact

86.2

10

Always consider environmental impact

88.3

8

Industry (% TEA in business services)

6.9

42

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

17.1

12

14.7

19.7

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

10.0

8

5.0

15.1

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

68.5

10

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

65.2

5

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

45.9

33

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

20.4

45

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.7 (13/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.5 (9/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.3 (10/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
4.9 (11/13)

9
8
7
6
5

Tunisia
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.6 (9/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
3.5 (9/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
3.8 (7/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
4.3 (11/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
3.8 (8/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
4.7 (7/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
3.4 (4/13)

204

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.0 (8/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.0 (10/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe economy in Tunisia was going through a critical
period in 2022, with existing structural problems
aggravated by the aftermath of the pandemic andthe consequences of the war in Ukraine. In the year
to Q3 2022, GDP grew by nearly 3%, inflation reachedalmost 10% and the unemployment rate exceeded 15%.
Inflation has hindered entrepreneurial intentions byraising costs, especially raw materials and borrowing
costs.
In 2022, the government published three decrees
regulating laws on crowdfunding, while the Ministryof Employment organized a national “Your Project”
competition.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The collective judgement of national experts in Tunisia
was that the quality of the overall entrepreneurial
environment was poor in 2022, deriving a score of 3.7 in
the National Entrepreneurial Context Index (NECI), well
below sufficient (<5.0). This ranked Tunisia 47th of the
51 economies participating in the GEM National Expert
Survey (NES). None of the 13 individual conditions
was rated as sufficient (≥5.0), although its PhysicalInfrastructure and Commercial and Professional
Infrastructure came closest. Ten of the Entrepreneurial
Framework Conditions were poor. Tunisia had eight
Framework Conditions ranked in the bottom 10 among
the GEM economies, with its highest ranks being forgovernment policy, ranked 38th.
So there is much to do to improve theentrepreneurial environment in Tunisia. A good place
to start might be entrepreneurial education in schools,
rated lowest of the Framework Conditions, although
investment here takes a long time to bear fruit. A faster
return may come from investment in entrepreneurial
finance, a significant obstacle to starting or developing
a new business in Tunisia.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Two out of three adults in Tunisia reported that the
pandemic had reduced their household income in
2022, a high rate but middle-ranking among the GEM
Level C economies. However, the proportion of adults
investing in someone else’s new business was relatively
high at one in seven, perhaps reflecting the paucity ofentrepreneurial finance.
There was good awareness of entrepreneurship in
Tunisia, with two out of three adults knowing someone
who had recently started their own business. Three infour considered they have the skills and experienceto start a business. The proportion who saw good
opportunities to start a business locally was a little
lower at three in five, although nearly half of thesewould be deterred by fear of failure.
The percentage of adults actually starting or
running a new business in Tunisia in 2022 was 17%,although higher for men (20%) than for women (15%).
Hence there were four men starting or running a new
business for every three women doing the same. The
percentage of adults running an established business
was relatively high at 10%, so there were less than two
adults starting a new business for every adult runningan established one, a healthy ratio that suggests that,
despite the generally unsupportive entrepreneurial
environment, many new businesses are surviving longenough to become established. This may be helped by
the fact that only a half of new businesses in Tunisia
were in consumer services, a sector that typically has
lower chances of survival.
Not surprisingly, “to earn a living because jobs
are scarce” was agreed as a motivation by nine in 10
new entrepreneurs, with “to make a difference in theworld” agreed by less than one in three. However, job
expectations were relatively strong, with one in fiveexpecting to employ an additional six people or morein five years’ time. Conversely, one in three of thosestarting or running a new business expected to employ
no new people in that period.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
Majdi Hassen

The Arab Institute of Business Leaders
IACE

IACE

The Arab Institute of Business Leaders
IACE

Expertise France

Contact

Team members
Hajer Karaa
Manara Toukabri
Moez Labidi

majdi.hassen@iace.org.tn
hkaraa@iace.org.tn

Kamel GhazouaniType of institution

Mokhtar Kouki

Institute
Websitehttps://iace.tn/
Other institutions involved
Expertise France

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

205

ECONOMY PROFILE

United Arab Emirates
Q Population (2021): 9.9 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 66.8 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

60.1

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

72.2

10

It is easy to start a business

77.2

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

14

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

54.8

17

To build great wealth or very high income

69.5

15

7

To continue a family tradition

34.4

16

71.7

10

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

65.3

27

Fear of failure (opportunity)

39.2

38

Entrepreneurial intentions*

44.5

8

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

19.6

1

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

35.6

1

Always consider social impact

90.2

4=

Always consider environmental impact

90.0

7

Industry (% TEA in business services)

19.5

26=

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

25.5

6

19.7

28.0

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

4.5

36

3.1

5.1

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

66.2

12

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

25.7

44

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

81.9

2

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

50.2

19

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
7.9 (1/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
7.2 (1/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
7.2 (1/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.7 (4/22)

9
8
7
6
5

United Arab Emirates
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
7.5 (1/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
6.6 (2/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
6.9 (1/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.2 (3/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
7.0 (2/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.8 (1/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
6.8 (1/22)

206

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
7.1 (2/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
7.4 (1/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
2022 GDP growth in the United Arab Emirates was over
6%, with an average inflation rate of approximately 5%
and unemployment rate a little below 4%.
Inflation in the United Arab Emirates appears to
be under control and entrepreneurs have been given
opportunities to offset its impacts.
Entrepreneurship remains a high priority in the
United Arab Emirates, with the recently launched“Projects of the 50” targeting the next 50 years ofdevelopment there as it moves towards its 100th
independence anniversary in 2071.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The quality of the entrepreneurial environment in
the United Arab Emirates has been on an upward
trajectory in recent years, backed by high levels ofinvestment and government commitment. In 2019, theUnited Arab Emirates entrepreneurial environment
was assessed by its national experts to give a National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score of 5.8,
ranking it fifth of GEM economies and well above
regional comparators. This score improved in 2020 to
6.0, still ranked fifth among GEM economies, and thenleapt forward to 6.8 in 2021 to become the most highly
rated of all GEM economies. In 2022, the NECI rank was
further improved to a score of 7.2, the highest achievedsince the NECI was introduced in 2019 — just as theUnited Arab Emirates score of 6.8 had been the year
before.
The United Arab Emirates is not confined to afew high scores in specific Framework Conditions.
In 2022, the UAE ranked first in seven of the 13
Framework Conditions, and second in five more. Its
lowest rank among the 51 GEM economies was fifth
for Physical Infrastructure. Between 2021 and 2022,
the United Arab Emirates improved its scores in nine
Framework Conditions, with the largest increases
for Entrepreneurial Finance and Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School. Just two framework scores
declined in 2022, with Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics
falling a little, and Government Policy: Taxes andBureaucracy by rather more. In addition, the United
Arab Emirates had the second highest score for thequality of its recovery from the economic impacts ofthe pandemic.

Institution
Lead institution
United Arab Emirates University(UAEU)The United Arab Emirates has not been immune
to the impacts of the pandemic, with three in five
adults reporting that the pandemic had reduced theirhousehold income in 2022, a proportion little changed
since this question was introduced in 2020. Perhaps as aconsequence, the share of adults investing in someone
else’s new business declined in the early days of thepandemic, from 10% in 2019 to 4% in 2020. However,this has largely recovered since, reaching 9% in 2022.
Similarly, business intention fell in those early days, fromhalf of all adults intending to start their own businessin the next three years, to one-third. This has also
recovered strongly, and was almost a half in 2022.
Not surprisingly, many adults (three in five) in the
United Arab Emirates knew someone who had started
their own business recently, while seven in 10 saw
good opportunities to start a business locally. However,and in what is a recurring theme in the United ArabEmirates, almost half would be deterred by fear of
failure. New entrepreneurs are most motivated “tobuild great wealth or very high income” and “to earna living because jobs are scarce”, although “to make adifference in the world” was not far behind.
TEA fell slightly when the pandemic began, edged
back the following year, and has since surged ahead.
While it was one in six pre-pandemic, it reached one infour adults in 2022. EBO, on the other hand, fell more
sharply in the early days of the pandemic, from 7% in2019 to 2.5% in 2020. However, it recovered to 6.4% in
2021, but has dropped to 4.5% in 2022. This means theUnited Arab Emirates has gone from just over two new
adults starting a new business for every one runningan established business, to a ratio of more than five to
one in 2022. Converting these many new businesses
to become established will be a challenge, even withinsuch a high-quality entrepreneurial environment.
Considering the types of businesses being launched,as with other entrepreneurial variables, the proportionof international business (new entrepreneurs withcustomers beyond the United Arab Emirates) fell at
the onset of the pandemic but has recovered strongly,
reaching more than one in two in 2022. Encouragingly,
more than seven in 10 new entrepreneurs expected,
in the next six months, to use more digital technology
to sell their products. As has become usual in the
United Arab Emirates, job creation expectations werevery strong, with three out of four new entrepreneurs
expecting to employ another six people or more in five
years’ time, rising from two out of three.

WebsiteTeam members

https://www.uaeu.ac.ae/en

Chafik Bouhaddioui

https://gemuae.uaeu.ac.ae/en/

Llewellyn Thomas
Elif Bascavusoglu-Moreau

Team
Team leader
Teemu Kautonen

Type of institution

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review

Funders

APS vendor
KantarContact
gemuae@uaeu.ac.ae

United Arab Emirates University(UAEU)

University

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report207

ECONOMY PROFILE

United Kingdom
Q Population (2021): 67.3 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 49.7 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

47.6

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

44.4

38

It is easy to start a business

65.9

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

33

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

51.9

21

To build great wealth or very high income

61.1

21

13

To continue a family tradition

18.7

44

53.5

32

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

60.6

30

Fear of failure (opportunity)

52.9

7

Entrepreneurial intentions*

10.9

36

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

2.5

23=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

13.0

21

Always consider social impact

74.4

25

Always consider environmental impact

73.3

33

Industry (% TEA in business services)

34.0

9

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

12.9

18=

10.7

15.1

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

6.8

22=

4.3

9.4

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

27.0

42

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

46.1

22

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

60.0

14=

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

57.0

10

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
5.1 (13/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
4.9 (13/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
4.1 (19/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
5.5 (19/22)

9
8
7
6
5

United Kingdom
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.9 (20/22)

43

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.6 (15/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.3 (11/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.1 (13/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.7 (16/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
5.7 (12/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.3 (16/22)

208

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.2 (14/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.9 (15/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
After post-COVID expansion in 2021, the UK economy
slowed in 2022, with real GDP 0.4% below its pre-COVID
level in Q4 2019. Consumer price inflation reached
11% in October 2022. Higher input prices, especiallyfor energy, pushed some businesses to pass on priceincreases to consumers, others to change suppliers,
and some to scale down or consider closure.
Late in 2021 the government launched a large-scalebusiness support scheme “Help to Grow: Management”,
aimed at businesses with 5–249 employees, anddesigned to enhance their leadership and management
skills to enable future growth in productivity (https://www.gov.uk/business-finance-support/help-to-growmanagement-uk). The Rose Review, launched in2018 by Dame Alison Rose (CEO, NatWest Group) andinformed by GEM UK data, provides a sharp focus on thechallenges facing female entrepreneurs.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022, the United Kingdom ranked 25th in terms of
its overall entrepreneurial environment with a National
Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI) score of 4.7,
pretty much in the middle of the 51 economies in the
GEM National Expert Survey (NES), having scored
4.9 and been ranked 19th just a year earlier. It is not
surprising that framework scores worsened over theyear given chaotic trading conditions and supply chain
blockages, as the implications of Brexit continued
to be multiplied by the aftermath of the pandemic
and compounded by rising energy prices. In the
period 2021 to 2022, nine Framework Condition scores
worsened, led by Physical Infrastructure and Ease of
Entry: Burdens and Regulation, both directly related tothe post-Brexit, post-pandemic turmoil.
An economy once lauded for its world-leading
financial markets was assessed as insufficient in boththe level of, and access to, entrepreneurial finance,alongside insufficient entrepreneurial education at alllevels, and diminishing government policy support. An
economy with two of the world’s top five universities1

was rated as not sufficient (<5.0) in Research andDevelopment Transfers.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Over a quarter of adults in the United Kingdom
reported their household income had been
reduced by the pandemic in 2022. However, after
falling in the initial aftermath of the pandemic(from 9.3% to 7.8%), the proportion of adults in
the United Kingdom starting or running a new
business had recovered strongly, reaching a level of
12.9% in 2022, well above pre-pandemic levels. The
level of female entrepreneurship had increased alittle more than male, so that the male-to-female
entrepreneurship ratio fell from 1.7 in 2019 to 1.4
in 2022. This was still a significant gender gap,
suggesting many women were missing out on
entrepreneurial opportunities.
In 2022, just under half of all adults knew someone
who had recently started a new business, while slightly
less saw good opportunities to start a business locally.
Well over half considered themselves to have the skills
and experience to start that new business, althougha small majority of those seeing good opportunities
to start a new business would be deterred by fear of
failure.
Perhaps as a consequence of Brexit, theproportion of new entrepreneurs reporting they
had customers outside of the country fell between
2021 and 2022 (from 39% to 26%). “To building
great wealth or very high income” was the mostcommonly agreed motivation for starting a new
business in 2022, closely followed by “to earn a living
because jobs are scarce”. Nevertheless, “to make adifference in the world” was agreed by more thanhalf of all new entrepreneurs.
A promising three out of five new entrepreneurs
expected to use more digital technology to sell theirproducts in the next six months, with one in fiveexpecting to employ another five or more people infive years’ time.

1 World University Rankings 2022,
https://www.timeshighereducation.com

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader
Prof. Mark Hart, PhD

Department for Business, Energy andIndustrial Strategy (BEIS)

BMG Ltd, Birmingham, UK

Aston Business School, Aston
University

Welsh Government

Contact

Team members
Professor Jonathan Levie

Type of institution
University
Websitehttps://www.aston.ac.uk/research/bss/
abs/research-in-action/gem
Other institutions involved
Queen’s University Management

British Business Bank

Professor Tomasz Mickiewicz

Hunter Centre for Entrepreneurship,
University of Strathclyde

Professor Niels Bosma

Invest Northern Ireland

Wendy Ferris

NatWest GroupDr Neha Prashar

Department for the Economy inNorthern Ireland

Dr Karen Bonnermark.hart@aston.ac.uk
w.ferris@aston.ac.uk

Dr Anastasia Ri
Dr Samuel Mwaura
Dr Sreevas Sahasranamam
Dr Andy Loung

School, Queen’s University Belfast

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report209

ECONOMY PROFILE

United States
Q Population (2021): 331.9 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 69.3 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

55.6

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

46.0

37

It is easy to start a business

65.8

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

21

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

69.3

7

To build great wealth or very high income

70.8

14

14

To continue a family tradition

36.5

14

66.8

16

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

54.5

37

Fear of failure (opportunity)

43.1

28

Entrepreneurial intentions*

13.6

33

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

4.7

11

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

16.5

16

Always consider social impact

72.8

29

Always consider environmental impact

68.8

38=

Industry (% TEA in business services)

22.3

22

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

19.2

10=

18.1

20.3

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

9.2

11

7.9

10.5

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

32.9

34

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

53.3

13

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

56.6

17

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

50.4

18

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
7.0 (3/22)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
6.0 (5/22)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
5.0 (11/22)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.4 (6/22)

9
8
7
6
5

United States
Level A average(22 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.9 (21/22)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.9 (12/22)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
4.8 (17/22)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
5.4 (9/22)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
4.0 (21/22)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.4 (5/22)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.1 (17/22)

210

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
3.5 (12/22)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
4.7 (17/22)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPThe US economy remained unsettled, with the positive
impact of a declining unemployment rate (5.9% in July
2021 down to 3.5% in July 2022) being offset by firstand second-quarter contractions (GDP declined 1.6%
and 0.6% respectively), and the highest inflation rates(8.5% or more) in 40 years. Such high inflation rates add
uncertainty for entrepreneurs, as they must consider
the impact of price increases on everything from
customer demand to resource procurement.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
The United States continues to score high for
Physical Infrastructure and for Social and Cultural
Norm, giving a favourable view of entrepreneurship,
but also low in terms of government policy andprogrammes, Research and Development Transfersand Entrepreneurial Education at School, each ofwhich scored as less than sufficient (<5.0). In termsof Research and Development Transfers, the UnitedStates ranked 25th of the 51 economies participatingin the National Expert Survey (NES) in 2022, and in thebottom half of economies for all three governmentrelated conditions. As a result, the it ranked 15th interms of the overall entrepreneurial environment asmeasured by the National Entrepreneurship Context
Index (NECI) score. More positively, that overall score
has remained stable throughout the pandemic
period, with the United States scoring better thansufficient on the new COVID recovery topic in the NES
questionnaire.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The United States has a reputation as a hub ofentrepreneurship, perhaps justified by years ofconsistently high rates of adults starting or running a

new business, especially for a Level A economy. Since
2018, despite the pandemic (or perhaps because ofit), the level of TEA has exceeded 15%, reaching morethan 19% in 2022. Meanwhile, the entrepreneurial
gender gap (male TEA–female TEA) has been closing,from six percentage points in 2017 to just two in
2022.
Although the peak of the pandemic appears tohave passed, uncertainty about the future remains. For
example, a declining proportion of new entrepreneurs
expect to employ six or more people in five years’
time, from a third in 2019 to less than a quarter in
2022. More optimistically, there is keen awareness ofthe nature of market change, with more than halfof new entrepreneurs expecting to use more digitaltechnologies in the next six months.
In 2022, the level of EBO was just over 9%,
implying around two new businesses started forevery established business. More than half of US
adults know someone who has started a business,and self-confidence is high, with two out of threeconsidering they have the knowledge and experienceto start their own business. However, two in five of
those seeing good opportunities would be deterredby fear of failure. Around one in seven US adults
intend to start a business in the next three years,
a proportion that has fluctuated since 2020, after
falling slightly at the start of the pandemic. “To build
great wealth or very high income” and “to make adifference in the world” share the dominant position
among motivations, agreed by seven out of 10 US
entrepreneurs.
In 2022 there was a sharp rise in the proportion of
adults investing in someone else’s new business, up to
13% from 9% in 2021, reflecting post-COVID business
opportunities, but also perhaps perceived low returns
on other investments.

Institution

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Lead institution

Team leader

Babson College

Qualtrix

Babson College

Jeff Shay, PhD
Prof. Donna Kelley, PhD

Contact

Team members

smillion@babson.edu

Prof. Mahdi Majbouri, PhD
Prof. Andrew Corbett, PhD
Prof. Candida Brush, PhD
Type of institution

Prof. Caroline Daniels, PhD

Business School

Smaiyra Million

WebsiteClare Currie

https://www.babson.edu

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report211

ECONOMY PROFILE

Uruguay
Q Population (2021): 3.5 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 24.6 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

61.3

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

58.2

23

It is easy to start a business

38.7

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

13

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

40.5

33

To build great wealth or very high income

46.2

38

34

To continue a family tradition

27.2

27=

69.1

13

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

65.4

26

Fear of failure (opportunity)

46.7

18

Entrepreneurial intentions*

32.7

13

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

6.4

6=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

4.4

37

Always consider social impact

85.0

15

Always consider environmental impact

87.3

11

Industry (% TEA in business services)

16.1

31

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

26.3

5

23.9

28.9

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

6.4

25

4.5

8.4

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

56.8

17=

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

33.5

36

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

60.0

14=

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

42.2

26

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
3.9 (13/16)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
3.4 (14/16)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.8 (11/16)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
7.3 (2/16)

9
8
7
6
5

Uruguay
Level B average(16 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
3.8 (8/16)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.7 (7/16)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
5.0 (5/16)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
2.0 (16/16)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
5.9 (2/16)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
6.0 (3/16)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
4.2 (5/16)

212

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
2.3 (12/16)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.8 (2/16)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAPGDP in Uruguay increased by more than 5% in 2022,with inflation rising above 9% and unemployment
at almost 8%. Uruguay is a “dollarized” economy due
to its historic high inflation, causing inefficiencies ininventory management.
The government introduced the “law of urgent
consideration” giving tax benefits to small businesses
to help offset the economic impacts of the pandemic.

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022 improvements were evident in the assessed
quality of 10 of Uruguay’s 13 individual Framework
Conditions, which together pushed the overall
assessment of its entrepreneurial environment in
the National Entrepreneurship Context Index (NECI)
score up from 4.3 in 2021 to 4.5 in 2022, edging its rank
among GEM economies from 31st to 30th. Despite
these improvements, Uruguay still has too many(eight) conditions assessed as insufficient (<5.0), often
by a considerable margin. Much of the improvement
since 2021 has been in conditions already scored as
sufficient: in 2021, Uruguay had six conditions scored aspoor (<4.0) — and the same nmber in 2022.
Of particular concern is both the level of, and access
to, entrepreneurial finance, each assessed as poorin 2022. Finance is the lifeblood of the growing new
business: without it, both inception and growth canbe very difficult. Other areas suggest a very mixed
picture. For example, the score for Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation improved sharply, while thatfor Ease of Entry: Market Dynamics declined equally
sharply. At the same time three conditions that are thedirect responsibility of the government all improved:
both government policy conditions and Government
Entrepreneurial Programs.
So, while the improvements in 2022 are welcome,there is still much to do, particularly in addressing
those conditions scored as very poor. Uruguay is a
Level B economy with big ambitions: continuing to
improve its entrepreneurial environment is key torealizing those ambitions.

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
The percentage of adults in Uruguay reporting thatthe pandemic has reduced their household income
remains high at 56%, but is continuing to fall slowly. In
Institution
Lead institution
IEEM Business School, University ofMontevideo

Type of institution
University
Websitehttps://www.ieem.edu.uy/en

2018, the percentage of adults in Uruguay intending
to start a business in the next three years stood at
28%. In the early stages of the pandemic this rose to37%, subsequently declining to 33% in 2022. Similarly
the percentage of adults investing in someone
else’s business also rose in those early days and has
continued to increase, reaching 7% in 2022.
Adults in Uruguay do not lack confidence in theirown abilities. In 2022, seven out of 10 agreed they havethe skills and experience to start their own business.
Six out of 10 knew someone who had recently started abusiness, and almost as many saw good opportunities
to start a new business locally, although, as in mosteconomies, around a half of these would be deterredfrom starting that business by fear of failure.
The percentage of adults starting or running theirown business increased over the pandemic cycle,
from 16% in 2018 to 22% in 2020, and then up to 26% in
2022. So the share of adults starting or running a new
business had risen from just one in six to more than
one in four. Female rates have been increasing fastest:
while the male rate increased by a half since 2018,
the female rate has almost doubled over this period.
The proportion of adults running an establishedbusiness has been much more stable, falling slightly
at the onset of the pandemic and then recovering.
By 2022, there were more than four new businesses
for every established business in Uruguay, raisingquestions about what obstacles may be preventing
new businesses from transitioning into establishedones. Some of the answers may well be evident fromthe review of Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions
above.
“To earn a living because jobs are scarce” remained
the most commonly agreed motive among newentrepreneurs, although agreement with this had
fallen from four out of five in 2020 to just under twoout of three in 2022. Meanwhile, “to make a differencein the world” had increased in popularity, agreed bythree in 10 new entrepreneurs in Uruguay in 2020 and
four in 10 in 2022.
Just one in six new entrepreneurs had customers
beyond Uruguay, and three in five expected to use
more digital technology in the next six months to sell
their products. Job expectations were strong, with one
in four of those starting or running a new businessexpecting to employ another six or more people in five
years’ time.

Team

APS vendor

Team leader

Equipos Mori

Professor Leonardo Veiga, PhD
Team members

Contact

Gonzalo Avellanallveiga@um.edu.uy

Funders
ANDE
COUSA

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report213

ECONOMY PROFILE

Venezuela
Q Population (2021): 28.7 million (UN)Q GDP per capita (2021; PPP, international $): 17.5 thousand (World Bank)

Motivational

Attitudes and perceptions% Adults Rank/49
Know someone who has started a new
business

37.8

Good opportunities to start a business in my
area

63.7

15=

It is easy to start a business

52.6

Personally have the skills and knowledge(somewhat or strongly agree)
% TEA

43

Rank/49

To make a difference in the world

53.1

19

To build great wealth or very high income

62.5

19

22

To continue a family tradition

33.0

18

83.2

3

To earn a living because jobs are scarce

89.9

1

Fear of failure (opportunity)

33.4

45

Entrepreneurial intentions*

29.4

15

Activity% Adults Rank/49 % Female % Male
Entrepreneurship impact% Adults Rank/49
Job expectations (expecting to employ six ormore people in five years’ time)

2.1

26=

% TEA

Rank/49

International (25%+ revenue)

3.3

42=

Always consider social impact

85.4

11=

Always consider environmental impact

84.9

14

Industry (% TEA in business services)

4.9

45

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied withanother economy or economies.
* Strictly, as noted on p. 46, through this Report this is the percentageof those adults not already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.
** Those reporting “somewhat decrease” or “strongly decrease”.

TEA (Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity)

15.9

15

15.0

16.9

EBO (Established
Business Ownership)

2.6

46=

2.7

2.4

COVID-19 related% Adults Rank/49
Pandemic has led household income todecrease**

78.6

2

% TEA

Rank/49

Starting a business is more difficult than ayear ago

41.3

25=

Use more digital technology to sell products
or services

70.6

8

Pursue new opportunities due to pandemic

51.0

16

EXPERT RATINGS OF THE ENTREPRENEURIAL FRAMEWORK CONDITIONS
I. Social andCultural Norms
4.9 (8/13)

A1. Entrepreneurial Finance
1.9 (13/13)
A2. Ease of Accessto Entrepreneurial Finance10
3.5 (13/13)

H. PhysicalInfrastructure
4.0 (13/13)

9
8
7
6
5

Venezuela
Level C average(13 GEM economies;
see Section 1.5 and Table 1.1)

B1. Government Policy:
Support and Relevance
2.1 (13/13)

4
3

G2. Ease of Entry:
Burdens and Regulation
4.3 (7/13)

B2. Government Policy:
Taxes and Bureaucracy
1.7 (13/13)

2
1

G1. Ease of Entry:
Market Dynamics
7.1 (1/13)

C. Government
Entrepreneurial Programs
2.1 (13/13)

F. Commercial andProfessional Infrastructure
3.8 (13/13)
E. Research andDevelopment Transfers
2.1 (13/13)

214

D1. Entrepreneurial
Education at School
1.9 (11/13)
D2. Entrepreneurial
Education Post-School
5.2 (5/13)

EFCs scale:
0 = very inadequate
insufficient status,
10 = very adequate
sufficient status. Rank
recorded in brackets

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportPOLICY ROADMAP
According to estimates by the Central Bank ofVenezuela (BCV), GDP will have grown by nearly 19% in
2022. Venezuela has one of the highest inflation rates
in the world, estimated at 125% in 2022.
Towards the end of 2021, the government publishedthe Law for the Promotion and Development of New
Ventures to encourage new business creation and an
entrepreneurial culture. A “National Venture Fund” wasestablished, with seed capital of around $10 million,
as well as the Registro Nacional de Emprendimientos(RNE).

2022 Framework Conditions Review
In 2022, the National Entrepreneurial Context
Index (NECI) score for Venezuela was 3.2, lowestof all 51 economies participating in the GEM
National Expert Survey (NES) that year. Of the 13
Entrepreneurial Framework Conditions, Venezuela
was ranked last for six, and next to last for two
more. If an individual framework score of less than
three denotes very poor, then the Venezuelan
entrepreneurial environment was very poor for both
entrepreneurial finance conditions, both government
policy conditions, Government Entrepreneurial
Programs, Entrepreneurial Education at School andfor Research and Development Transfers. So boththe market and the government have been failingto provide a supportive or enabling environment
for entrepreneurship. Yet Venezuela also had two
conditions rated as sufficient: Ease of Entry: Market
Dynamics and Entrepreneurial Education Post-School.
So, overall, there is a poor entrepreneurial
environment, but with some evidence that Venezuela
can get some Framework Conditions right. How that
entrepreneurial environment develops in the future isa matter of political commitment as well as resources.
The new Law and National Venture Fund may signal a
positive direction for both.

Institution
Lead institution
IESA

UCAB

2022 Entrepreneurial Activity Review
Almost four out of five Venezuelan adults reported thatthe pandemic had reduced their household income in
2022, second highest of the GEM economies behindTogo. Almost three in ten adults expected to start abusiness in the next three years.
Only one in three adults knew someone who had
recently started a business, but confidence was high,with more than four out of five adults considering
themselves to have the skills and experience to beable to start their own, second highest of the Level C
economies, again behind Togo. Almost two in threesaw good opportunities to start a business locally, andonly one-third of these would have been deterred fromdoing so by the fear of failure.
The percentage of adults in Venezuela actually
starting or running a business in 2022 was almost
16%, although with slightly more men doing so than
women. Seven out of 10 of those new businesses
were in consumer services, in the middle for a Level
C economy. The percentage of adults running anestablished business was very low at less than 3%, joint
third lowest with Egypt and behind South Africa and
Mexico. The ratio of more than five people starting new
businesses for every person running an establishedbusiness probably reflects the difficulties of keeping
a new business viable long enough for it to become
established. This ratio was only exceeded by Mexico
among the 2022 GEM participants.
It is not surprising that nine out of 10 new
entrepreneurs in Venezuela agreed with the
motivation “to earn a living because jobs are scarce”.
Rather more surprising is that six out of 10 agreed withthe motive “to make a difference in the world”. Just
one in 10 of those new entrepreneurs had customers
outside of Venezuela, although that may change, withseven out of 10 agreeing that they expect to use moredigital technology to sell their products in the next six
months. Finally, just one in eight of those starting or
running a new business in Venezuela expect to employ
another six or more people in five years’ time.

Team

Funders

APS vendor

Team leader

IESA/UCAB

N/A

Edwin Ojeda
Aramís Rodríguez

Contact

Team members

aramis.rodriguez@iesa.edu.ve

Patricia Monteferrante
Anitza Freites

edwin.ojeda@iesa.edu.ve

Demetrio Marotta
Type of institution

Federico Fernandez

University

Maria Ponce

WebsiteJenifer Campos

https://www.iesa.edu.ve/
ucab.edu.ve

Susana Chu
Gustavo Garcia
Luz Aimara Morales
Luis Lauriño

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report215

PART 3

Appendix
TablesGEM Indicators

218

Knowing a Startup
Entrepreneur

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who personally know someone who
has started a business in the past two years.

Perceived Opportunities

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who agree that they see good
opportunities to start a business within the next six months in thearea in which they live.

Ease of Starting a
Business

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who agree that it is easy to start abusiness in their country.

Perceived Capabilities

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who agree that they have the required
knowledge, skills and experience to start a business.

Fear of Failure Rate

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who agree that they see good
opportunities but would not start a business for fear it might fail.

Nascent
Entrepreneurship Rate

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who are currently nascententrepreneurs, i.e. are actively involved in setting up a business they
will own or co-own; this business has not yet paid salaries, wages ormade any other payments to the owners for more than three months.

New Business
Ownership Rate

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who are currently owner-managers ofa new business, i.e. who own and manage a running business that has
paid salaries, wages or made any other payments to the owners formore than three months, but not more than 42 months (3.5 years).

Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA)

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who are either a nascententrepreneurs or owner-managers of a new business, i.e. theproportion of the adult population who are either starting or runninga new business.

Established Business
Ownership Rate (EBO)

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who are currently owner-managers ofan established business, i.e. who are owning and managing a runningbusiness that has paid salaries, wages or made any other payments tothe owners for over 42 months (3.5 years).

Business Services

Percentage of TEA respondents involved in business services.

Consumer Services

Percentage of TEA respondents involved in consumer services.

Entrepreneurial Employee
Activity (EEA)

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who, as employees, have been
involved in entrepreneurial activities such as developing or launching
new goods or services, or setting up a new business unit, a new
establishment, or a subsidiary in the last three years.

Sponsored

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who are involved in TEA and thatbusiness is part-owned with their employer.

Independent

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who are involved in TEA and thatbusiness is independently owned.

Motive for Starting a
Business: “To make adifference in the world”

Percentage of TEA respondents who agree that a reason for starting
their business is “to make a difference in the world”.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportMotive for Starting a
Business: “To build great
wealth or very highincome”

Percentage of TEA respondents who agree that a reason for starting
their business is “to build great wealth or a very high income”.

Motive for Starting a
Business: “To continue afamily tradition”

Percentage of TEA respondents who agree that a reason for starting
their business is “to continue a family tradition”.

Motive for Starting a
Business: “To earn a living
because jobs are scarce”

Percentage of TEA respondents who agree that a reason for starting
their business is “to earn a living because jobs are scarce”.

High Growth Expectation
Entrepreneurial Activity

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 involved in TEA who expect toemploy six or more people five years from now.

Internationally Oriented
Entrepreneurial Activity

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 involved in TEA who anticipate 25%
or more revenue coming from outside their country.

Scope (local/national/
international)

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 involved in TEA having customers
only within their local area, only within their country, or those having
international customers.

Product/Services Impact(local/national/global)

Percentage adults aged 18–64 involved in TEA having products orservices that are either new to the area, new to their country or new tothe world.

Technology/Procedures
Impact (local/national/
global)Percentage of adults aged 18–64 involved in TEA having technology orprocedures that are either new to the area, new to their country or new
to the world.

Informal Investment

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 investing in someone else’s new
business in the last three years.

Business Exit Rate

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who have exited a business inthe past 12 months, either by selling, shutting down or otherwise
discontinuing an owner/management relationship with that business.

Exit, Business Continues

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who have exited a business in thepast 12 months and that business has continued.

Exit, Business Does Not
Continue

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who have exited a business in thepast 12 months and that business has not continued.

PANDEMIC-RELATED INDICATORSHousehold Income Impact

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who consider that the pandemic has
led their household income to somewhat or strongly decrease.

Knowing an Entrepreneur
Who Stopped a Business

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who know someone who has stopped
a business because of the pandemic.

Knowing an Entrepreneur
Who Started a Business

Percentage of adults aged 18–64 who know someone who has started
a business because of the pandemic.

Pandemic Opportunities

Percentage of TEA respondents who agree or strongly agree that the
pandemic has provided new opportunities they wish to pursue.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report219

Table A1. Impact of pandemic on household income in past year(% of adults aged 18–64 )Strongly
decrease

Somewhatdecrease

No substantialchangeAustria

A

8.6

23.4

61.2

Brazil

C

34.9

21.9

31.5

Canada

A

11.7

21.8

50.4

Chile

B

22.4

29.2

37.7

China

C

19.5

54.2

24.6

Colombia

C

32.5

40.5

17.7

Croatia

B

5.6

13.7

32.1

Cyprus

A

22.6

22.1

49.2

Egypt

C

40.1

32.3

23.2

France

A

11.1

21.3

58.6

Germany

A

8.3

23.4

56.5

Greece

B

28.7

29.4

40.4

Guatemala

C

25.7

38.2

22.7

Hungary

B

9.3

19.8

58.0

India

C

33.5

40.4

20.3

Indonesia

C

26.2

49.0

23.5

Iran

C

14.7

35.1

44.6

Israel

A

9.7

26.6

57.8

Japan

A

5.8

20.0

67.0

Latvia

B

11.5

16.9

59.7

Lithuania

A

8.1

21.0

58.2

Luxembourg

A

6.8

20.7

63.6

Mexico

B

39.6

37.9

14.5

Morocco

C

30.1

36.2

31.6

Netherlands

A

6.4

17.2

65.9

Norway

A

1.6

7.0

84.3

Oman

B

16.4

29.1

52.6

Panama

B

37.6

32.8

18.2

Poland

B

17.1

43.7

30.1

Puerto Rico

B

25.8

30.2

30.2

220

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportSomewhatincrease

Strongly increase

5.9

0.9

7.6

4.0

12.0

4.0

7.1

3.5

1.4

0.4

5.8

3.5

42.1

6.4

4.5

1.5

3.3

1.1

6.9

2.0

10.3

1.4

1.3

0.3

8.7

4.7

10.8

2.1

5.6

0.2

1.3

0.0

5.1

0.5

5.0

1.0

6.1

1.1

10.5

1.4

10.6

2.1

7.0

1.9

4.0

4.0

1.8

0.3

8.3

2.1

5.4

1.6

1.6

0.3

6.3

5.1

8.3

0.8

8.8

5.0

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report221

Table A1 (continued)

Strongly
decrease

Somewhatdecrease

No substantialchange

Qatar

A

13.6

30.5

51.6

Republic of Korea

A

0.7

34.3

49.3

Romania

B

11.5

22.3

54.2

Saudi Arabia

A

10.2

37.7

43.6

Serbia

B

19.0

31.2

44.7

Slovak Republic

B

21.3

35.3

37.2

Slovenia

A

6.1

18.8

61.2

South Africa

C

40.2

23.5

19.2

Spain

A

14.7

25.5

54.6

Sweden

A

5.5

16.5

61.0

Switzerland

A

4.9

18.0

70.5

Taiwan

B

18.2

26.0

53.9

Togo

C

75.8

12.2

8.4

Tunisia

C

40.8

27.7

29.9

United Arab Emirates

A

29.1

37.1

26.4

United Kingdom

A

8.4

18.6

60.8

United States

A

12.6

20.3

49.5

Uruguay

B

28.2

28.6

35.9

Venezuela

C

52.2

26.4

17.0

222

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportSomewhatincrease

Strongly increase

3.8

0.6

15.7

0.0

10.6

1.4

7.7

0.8

4.9

0.2

4.8

1.4

11.9

2.0

7.3

9.9

4.5

0.7

14.1

2.9

5.3

1.4

1.4

0.6

0.8

2.8

1.4

0.3

4.9

2.5

9.0

3.1

12.5

5.0

4.6

2.8

3.2

1.2

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

223

Table A2.

Entrepreneurial activity (% of adults aged 18–64)

An equals sign (=) indicates that the ranking position is tied with another economy or economies

Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity

Established Business
Ownership

Informal investment

Score

Rank/49

Score

Rank/49

Score

Rank/49

Austria

6.8

40

8.3

15=

4.3

20=

Brazil

20.0

8=

10.4

7

10.8

5

Canada

16.5

13

6.2

27

4.5

18=

Chile

27.0

4

7.3

19

22.4

1

China

6.0

44=

3.2

43

4.3

20=

Colombia

28.0

2

5.1

34

2.6

34=

Croatia

13.2

17

3.4

42

2.8

32=

Cyprus

8.3

34=

5.7

29=

3.3

27

Egypt

6.6

41

2.6

46=

2.0

39=

France

9.2

29

2.9

44=

5.3

15=

Germany

9.1

30=

3.6

40

3.1

29

Greece

4.9

47

13.3

3

2.1

38

Guatemala

29.4

1

11.6

5

14.0

2

Hungary

9.9

28

6.9

21

2.0

39=

India

11.5

24

9.0

12=

2.5

36

Indonesia

8.1

36

5.7

29=

3.2

28

Iran

16.4

14

10.8

6

4.6

17

Israel

8.7

32

3.5

41

2.4

37

Japan

6.4

43

6.3

26

1.5

47=

Latvia

14.2

16

12.3

4

4.2

22=

Lithuania

12.7

20

8.3

15=

3.9

25

Luxembourg

7.0

39

5.3

33

4.5

18=

Mexico

12.9

18=

1.6

49

1.8

42=

Morocco

4.2

48

4.1

37=

1.9

41

Netherlands

12.5

21

6.8

22=

6.3

12

Norway

6.5

42

5.6

31=

4.2

22=

Oman

11.7

23

4.1

37=

3.5

26

Panama

27.9

3

5.8

28

8.2

8

224

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportTotal early-stage
Entrepreneurial
Activity

Established Business
Ownership

Informal investment

Score

Rank/49

Score

Rank/49

Score

Rank/49

1.6

49

9.8

9

1.6

45=

Puerto Rico

20.0

8=

5.6

31=

1.8

42=

Qatar

10.7

25=

3.9

39

9.1

7

Republic of Korea

11.9

22

19.9

1

2.8

32=

Romania

8.3

34=

8.6

14

1.5

47=

Saudi Arabia

19.2

10=

9.7

10

12.0

4

Serbia

10.5

27

2.9

44=

1.3

49

Slovak Republic

10.7

25=

6.6

24

2.9

30=

Slovenia

8.0

37

8.1

18

4.0

24

South Africa

8.5

33

1.8

48

1.6

45=

Spain

6.0

44=

7.0

20

2.9

30=

Sweden

9.1

30=

4.8

35

6.7

9=

Switzerland

7.4

38

8.2

17

6.7

9=

Taiwan

5.6

46

9.0

12=

5.3

15=

Togo

24.1

7

18.0

2

12.3

3

Tunisia

17.1

12

10.0

8

9.4

6

United Arab Emirates

25.5

6

4.5

36

5.4

13=

United Kingdom

12.9

18=

6.8

22=

2.6

34=

United States

19.2

10=

9.2

11

6.5

11

Uruguay

26.3

5

6.4

25

5.4

13=

Venezuela

15.9

15

2.6

46=

1.7

44

PolandGlobal Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report225

Table A3. Public attitudes and perceptions (% of adults aged 18–64 somewhat orstrongly agree)

Knowing someone
who has started
a business in thepast two years“There are good
opportunities tostart a businessin the area
where I live”“In my country,
it is easy to starta business”

Austria

50.9

49.5

48.4

Brazil

75.8

67.9

46.8

Canada

47.3

58.8

63.0

Chile

68.6

50.5

51.1

China

56.3

56.5

25.9

Colombia

63.8

53.4

41.4

Croatia

66.5

60.0

34.0

Cyprus

82.4

26.8

48.4

Egypt

32.9

63.7

67.7

France

59.7

52.4

55.4

Germany

34.2

39.5

34.6

Greece

28.5

36.4

31.9

Guatemala

71.5

68.3

47.8

Hungary

47.9

27.2

47.4

India

47.4

75.5

78.0

Indonesia

71.4

87.2

72.2

Iran

64.1

51.3

23.7

Israel

59.2

46.8

12.9

Japan

20.4

12.7

27.5

Latvia

38.0

34.6

29.4

Lithuania

53.1

40.4

36.5

Luxembourg

41.3

52.4

64.2

Mexico

47.7

56.4

46.3

Morocco

51.6

62.5

36.5

Netherlands

54.5

61.6

82.9

Norway

42.6

73.6

82.8

Oman

58.5

75.7

56.5

226

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report*“You personallyhave the knowledge,
skills and experience
required to starta business”“You see good
opportunities, butwould not start abusiness for fear
it might fail” (% ofthose seeing good
opportunities)“Are you expecting
to start a businessin the next three
years?”*

53.2

37.9

5.4

69.2

49.0

53.0

55.4

51.8

14.2

70.1

44.9

46.1

54.4

56.7

6.4

66.6

38.5

21.2

73.6

48.6

19.5

52.7

51.7

18.3

62.8

50.6

47.3

49.8

41.0

15.8

36.2

44.3

6.5

53.8

49.5

8.3

77.5

43.2

46.5

36.8

34.0

8.7

78.1

54.0

20.1

75.5

36.8

33.3

54.2

30.9

27.5

35.4

44.0

12.3

14.9

50.9

5.1

53.9

36.7

17.6

49.8

46.2

15.1

50.0

44.1

14.0

67.1

45.5

17.5

63.3

44.4

37.3

42.2

33.8

16.2

49.2

41.0

5.5

57.6

33.3

44.3

Strictly, this is the percentage of adults excluding those already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report227

Table A3 (continued)

Knowing someone
who has started
a business in thepast two years“There are good
opportunities tostart a businessin the area
where I live”“In my country,
it is easy to starta business”

Panama

48.0

53.4

54.2

Poland

46.7

72.3

79.4

Puerto Rico

66.0

64.1

26.7

Qatar

64.2

81.0

67.3

Republic of Korea

39.5

41.0

37.4

Romania

46.2

63.8

42.5

Saudi Arabia

88.2

89.5

88.7

Serbia

54.6

37.8

32.7

Slovak Republic

59.3

29.4

20.4

Slovenia

53.5

55.0

67.7

South Africa

33.6

61.3

63.9

Spain

41.3

26.0

32.2

Sweden

53.8

76.7

79.8

Switzerland

52.1

47.0

66.5

Taiwan

29.0

46.8

40.5

Togo

58.9

77.2

54.3

Tunisia

66.6

61.8

44.7

United Arab Emirates

60.1

72.2

77.2

United Kingdom

47.6

44.4

65.9

United States

55.6

46.0

65.8

Uruguay

61.3

58.2

38.7

Venezuela

37.8

63.7

52.6

228

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report*“You personallyhave the knowledge,
skills and experience
required to starta business”“You see good
opportunities, butwould not start abusiness for fear
it might fail” (% ofthose seeing good
opportunities)“Are you expecting
to start a businessin the next three
years?”*

76.7

48.3

53.0

47.8

53.1

2.5

68.9

45.2

26.3

64.1

43.0

43.6

54.8

18.3

23.9

62.7

55.7

6.4

88.1

63.3

31.8

66.1

41.3

12.4

42.9

42.9

8.6

62.8

50.2

15.3

63.7

59.4

6.0

46.5

50.9

8.3

49.4

41.5

13.7

47.6

32.3

10.5

39.9

42.9

15.2

87.5

40.6

52.3

78.6

42.6

50.7

71.7

39.2

44.5

53.5

52.9

10.9

66.8

43.1

13.6

69.1

46.7

32.7

83.2

33.4

29.4

Strictly, this is the percentage of adults excluding those already engaged in entrepreneurial activity.

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report229

Table A4. Attitudes and perceptions of entrepreneurs: % of Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA) and % of Established Business Ownership (EBO)

The % of those startingor running a new or
established business who
agree/strongly agree that
pandemic has provided
new opportunities
that they want topursue/are pursuing

The % of those startingor running a new or
established business
who think starting abusiness is somewhat
or much more difficult
as a year ago

% TEA

% EBO

% TEA

% EBO

Austria

41.3

40.4

34.9

28.4

Brazil

53.7

51.6

64.8

60.8

Canada

49.8

48.6

55.5

36.8

Chile

67.5

70.1

63.3

50.7

China

84.2

88.4

31.3

18.4

Colombia

50.6

59.9

51.2

37.2

Croatia

32.2

22.9

34.8

29.0

Cyprus

56.5

57.0

40.1

19.3

Egypt

35.2

20.8

43.5

44.8

France

29.5

36.0

39.7

20.7

Germany

40.2

44.2

45.5

38.1

Greece

40.3

59.4

21.2

14.9

Guatemala

59.6

60.9

53.0

39.7

Hungary

42.9

33.9

17.4

10.2

India

68.0

50.2

68.8

68.2

Indonesia

34.8

39.6

46.7

25.0

Iran

62.3

67.2

21.6

14.2

Israel

38.5

40.1

49.9

37.9

Japan

26.8

45.4

28.2

12.3

Latvia

46.3

48.8

35.0

22.3

Lithuania

50.2

58.9

29.2

27.0

Luxembourg

49.7

44.5

50.7

49.3

Mexico

48.5

42.8

54.9

49.5

Morocco

33.6

34.4

32.1

23.0

Netherlands

32.6

35.1

48.1

32.3

230

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

The % of thosestarting or runninga new or establishedbusiness who expect
to use more digitaltechnologies to sell
products or services in
the next six months

The % of those startingor running a new or
established business
who agree/strongly
agree that they
always consider thesocial implicationsof decisions

The % of thosestarting or runninga new or establishedbusiness who agree/strongly agree thatthey always consider
the environmental
implications ofdecisions

The % of thosestarting or runninga new or establishedbusiness who areaware of the United
Nations Sustainable
Development Goals

% TEA

% EBO

% TEA

% EBO

% TEA

% EBO

% TEA

% EBO

43.6

20.8

69.3

62.4

67.4

64.4

30.4

25.7

85.4

70.6

90.2

91.0

91.3

94.5

–

–

55.3

43.4

69.9

74.9

75.8

75.0

30.8

25.7

75.4

56.8

88.1

86.9

91.9

90.2

15.0

17.2

36.9

34.1

78.4

71.5

85.8

86.8

34.4

36.8

62.3

46.0

69.6

74.3

76.3

79.4

11.8

13.2

50.1

49.2

81.0

71.2

82.5

82.2

27.8

30.3

53.0

30.9

73.4

62.9

70.2

56.9

14.1

19.6

64.0

44.8

79.7

75.6

77.2

73.9

7.8

10.0

17.6

30.3

74.3

58.9

74.0

63.6

28.0

27.3

46.0

33.3

61.1

50.3

54.5

61.5

–

–

47.3

22.0

72.2

69.6

77.1

79.6

19.3

17.3

72.6

61.4

93.3

90.3

93.5

90.0

–

–

37.7

18.1

66.6

57.1

80.3

65.9

24.7

22.7

28.2

22.8

84.7

82.6

74.2

79.6

7.9

4.4

60.9

40.0

88.6

83.4

84.2

80.0

6.9

12.6

53.4

33.5

71.3

42.6

68.8

36.9

–

–

48.5

23.3

55.2

47.2

47.6

36.2

15.4

8.8

54.4

40.7

64.6

51.2

55.6

59.7

–

–

45.6

25.8

70.7

68.0

76.0

78.3

25.9

19.7

28.8

23.3

71.4

81.9

76.3

82.0

16.2

23.8

55.0

43.8

85.3

80.4

82.4

82.0

–

–

78.9

73.6

85.2

87.9

87.5

84.1

8.9

15.4

63.4

38.2

58.9

57.7

55.6

61.2

5.0

5.0

38.5

23.6

67.8

67.1

66.1

63.3

–

–

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report231

Table A4 (continued)

The % of those startingor running a new or
established business who
agree/strongly agree that
pandemic has provided
new opportunities
that they want topursue/are pursuing

The % of those startingor running a new or
established business
who think starting abusiness is somewhat
or much more difficult
as a year ago

% TEA

% EBO

% TEA

% EBO

Norway

39.1

33.4

36.0

33.0

Oman

25.1

26.7

51.9

25.8

Panama

58.1

58.6

61.1

44.4

Poland

30.2

16.6

38.1

36.7

Puerto Rico

55.1

57.9

66.9

38.8

Qatar

36.0

50.2

60.0

42.2

Republic of Korea

49.6

67.8

10.5

1.8

Romania

43.9

60.0

63.0

38.0

Saudi Arabia

15.5

15.2

67.2

51.1

Serbia

29.4

45.5

20.3

19.3

Slovak Republic

9.3

7.1

32.6

25.7

Slovenia

21.9

20.8

48.5

35.7

South Africa

57.8

55.4

58.9

46.5

Spain

53.1

52.5

40.3

27.2

Sweden

23.7

23.1

33.4

33.0

Switzerland

28.8

40.1

36.4

27.0

Taiwan

39.5

69.3

41.9

21.5

Togo

75.4

81.2

18.1

18.4

Tunisia

65.2

75.0

20.4

23.8

United Arab Emirates

25.7

36.7

50.2

51.7

United Kingdom

46.1

55.2

57.0

36.9

United States

53.3

57.2

50.4

45.4

Uruguay

33.5

37.8

42.2

31.4

Venezuela

41.3

21.5

51.0

36.9

232

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

The % of thosestarting or runninga new or establishedbusiness who expect
to use more digitaltechnologies to sell
products or services in
the next six months

The % of those startingor running a new or
established business
who agree/strongly
agree that they
always consider thesocial implicationsof decisions

The % of thosestarting or runninga new or establishedbusiness who agree/strongly agree thatthey always consider
the environmental
implications ofdecisions

The % of thosestarting or runninga new or establishedbusiness who areaware of the United
Nations Sustainable
Development Goals

% TEA

% EBO

% TEA

% EBO

% TEA

% EBO

% TEA

% EBO

47.7

31.9

48.5

54.0

61.8

66.9

61.3

54.1

54.7

37.7

54.6

68.7

48.5

63.4

–

–

80.3

62.4

90.9

88.0

93.7

91.5

–

–

29.1

14.7

85.4

91.9

83.5

90.6

43.2

60.3

78.4

56.2

89.4

92.1

90.3

88.9

–

–

55.6

64.9

78.7

79.2

82.7

77.8

14.9

14.8

46.4

61.0

67.7

63.3

62.2

72.6

30.5

22.9

38.4

31.0

88.8

90.5

85.0

88.0

29.2

47.3

62.1

71.7

79.5

82.2

82.5

83.0

–

–

33.1

28.2

74.0

75.3

78.3

77.6

12.4

11.6

34.0

22.0

71.1

71.4

70.7

71.8

30.2

26.0

52.4

26.0

83.4

88.2

93.0

86.9

30.2

22.9

45.1

36.5

83.0

80.4

75.5

70.9

18.7

15.4

46.5

26.6

68.5

65.9

68.9

71.7

30.8

26.1

36.5

29.2

60.0

57.7

60.8

59.9

–

–

31.9

20.8

71.4

69.6

75.3

69.9

32.6

17.7

57.8

31.3

90.9

77.6

87.4

80.3

31.7

23.6

32.4

18.2

75.4

61.1

70.4

54.3

22.9

7.0

45.9

31.7

86.2

90.1

88.3

91.1

6.5

9.3

81.9

79.1

90.2

87.9

90.0

84.4

30.6

26.8

60.0

31.3

74.4

61.7

73.3

61.7

–

–

56.6

40.6

72.8

64.3

68.8

63.1

–

–

60.0

41.9

85.0

78.2

87.3

78.7

11.0

16.4

70.6

70.8

85.4

86.2

84.9

82.6

–

–

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report233

Table A5.

Entrepreneurial activity by age, gender and education

Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA) by gender

Established Business
Ownership (EBO)by gender% Male% Female% Male% FemaleAustria

7.4

6.1

10.6

6.1

Brazil

23.0

17.2

14.2

6.8

Canada

18.3

14.8

7.0

5.4

Chile

28.9

25.2

8.8

5.8

China

6.9

5.0

3.5

2.9

Colombia

30.1

26.1

6.2

4.0

Croatia

17.0

9.5

4.3

2.5

Cyprus

11.7

4.9

7.6

3.9

Egypt

9.4

3.7

4.0

1.1

France

11.2

7.3

3.7

2.2

Germany

11.0

7.1

4.5

2.6

Greece

6.3

3.4

16.5

10.2

Guatemala

30.8

28.2

13.6

9.7

Hungary

12.0

7.9

9.4

4.6

India

11.6

11.4

10.5

7.6

Indonesia

7.0

9.2

5.5

5.9

Iran

19.3

13.6

17.6

3.9

Israel

10.5

7.0

3.3

3.6

Japan

9.1

3.6

8.6

4.1

Latvia

17.8

10.6

16.3

8.4

Lithuania

16.6

9.0

10.9

5.7

Luxembourg

8.5

5.4

6.6

3.5

Mexico

13.8

12.1

2.2

1.0

Morocco

5.4

3.1

6.8

1.5

Netherlands

15.3

9.6

8.3

5.3

Norway

8.3

4.5

7.6

3.5

Oman

11.8

11.6

5.5

2.6

234

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportTotal early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA) by % of age group

Level of Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA) for graduates andfor non-graduates% 18–34% 35–64% ofgraduates% of nongraduates

7.1

6.6

9.4

6.3

22.8

18.1

17.8

20.7

24.4

12.3

17.9

11.6

26.6

27.3

27.5

25.9

8.9

4.4

7.5

4.7

29.1

27.0

31.3

24.6

21.3

9.6

17.3

10.4

12.4

5.8

10.4

5.1

7.5

5.5

8.4

5.1

11.4

8.0

10.9

6.7

13.9

6.8

12.2

7.2

5.1

4.7

5.3

4.4

35.2

22.3

42.2

28.2

12.4

8.6

11.8

8.8

9.8

13.3

11.6

11.5

7.4

8.6

9.0

8.0

19.9

13.3

17.9

14.9

8.4

8.9

8.9

0.0

6.1

6.5

6.4

6.0

21.1

11.1

17.7

11.5

18.3

10.2

13.2

11.3

6.2

7.4

10.3

3.8

14.8

11.3

17.2

12.0

5.2

3.1

5.8

3.3

17.7

9.6

15.1

11.1

4.8

7.4

7.3

5.4

13.4

9.6

15.3

8.1

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report235

Table A5 (continued)

Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA) by gender

Established Business
Ownership (EBO)by gender% Male% Female% Male% FemalePanama

31.2

24.6

7.9

3.7

Poland

1.5

1.6

10.0

9.6

Puerto Rico

22.3

17.9

8.0

3.4

Qatar

10.6

11.0

4.4

2.1

Republic of Korea

15.2

8.5

24.3

15.3

Romania

9.9

6.5

10.1

7.1

Saudi Arabia

21.6

16.1

9.5

10.1

Serbia

14.7

6.4

4.1

1.8

Slovak Republic

11.9

9.5

9.1

4.0

Slovenia

10.3

5.6

9.8

6.2

South Africa

9.1

7.9

2.0

1.7

Spain

6.0

5.9

7.5

6.5

Sweden

11.0

7.1

6.1

3.4

Switzerland

8.4

6.3

8.4

8.0

Taiwan

6.9

4.3

13.0

5.0

Togo

22.6

25.4

17.0

18.9

Tunisia

19.7

14.7

15.1

5.0

United Arab Emirates

28.0

19.7

5.1

3.1

United Kingdom

15.1

10.7

9.4

4.3

United States

20.3

18.1

10.5

7.9

Uruguay

28.88

23.87

8.4

4.5

Venezuela

16.89

15.02

2.4

2.7

236

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportTotal early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA) by % of age group

Level of Total early-stage
Entrepreneurial Activity(TEA) for graduates andfor non-graduates% 18–34% 35–64% ofgraduates% of nongraduates

29.1

27.0

30.4

25.1

3.0

0.9

1.6

1.4

23.1

18.3

22.6

12.5

9.5

11.8

10.4

11.5

10.7

12.4

12.7

10.8

11.3

6.8

9.4

2.4

18.8

19.6

18.8

20.1

14.3

8.6

16.5

8.4

13.5

9.4

15.0

8.8

13.4

5.8

10.2

6.1

9.3

7.5

11.3

6.6

6.0

6.0

8.0

4.1

12.2

7.3

10.2

7.8

6.6

7.8

7.5

7.0

7.5

4.6

5.9

4.8

26.3

21.1

29.0

23.3

15.8

18.1

15.4

18.0

24.7

26.5

26.5

18.2

15.9

11.2

15.2

10.3

27.0

14.5

19.5

18.3

31.7

22.5

29.1

25.9

16.3

15.7

18.8

14.7

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report237

Table A6. Sector distribution of new entrepreneurial activity(% of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity)

Businessoriented
services

Consumeroriented
services

Extractive
sectorTransforming
sectorAustria

34.7

46.2

5.1

14.0

Brazil

19.8

57.4

2.3

20.5

Canada

33.8

43.0

1.9

21.3

Chile

16.9

53.5

4.4

25.3

China

8.5

75.2

1.5

14.8

Colombia

8.2

72.8

0.6

18.5

Croatia

32.7

32.8

11.2

23.3

Cyprus

27.1

54.8

2.9

15.2

Egypt

7.4

47.8

17.4

27.5

France

33.9

42.3

3.5

20.3

Germany

29.9

51.6

1.6

16.9

Greece

17.4

49.6

9.0

24.0

Guatemala

5.4

77.9

2.8

14.0

Hungary

26.6

39.1

6.6

27.8

India

4.8

66.8

7.6

20.8

Indonesia

2.3

87.9

2.7

7.1

Iran

17.5

56.3

5.3

20.9

Israel

42.7

44.7

0.6

11.9

Japan

41.7

51.6

0.8

5.9

Latvia

28.5

36.6

6.9

28.0

Lithuania

20.0

42.2

10.1

27.7

Luxembourg

40.3

49.2

2.9

7.6

Mexico

5.3

74.9

2.7

17.2

Morocco

11.8

71.7

2.1

14.5

Netherlands

30.8

49.8

1.1

18.3

Norway

38.7

31.2

14.5

15.6

Oman

14.4

64.0

2.8

18.8

Panama

11.5

66.7

5.5

16.3

Poland

19.5

44.3

5.5

30.7

238

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Businessoriented
services

Consumeroriented
services

Extractive
sectorTransforming
sectorPuerto Rico

22.4

60.0

2.3

15.4

Qatar

27.5

40.7

0.3

31.5

Republic of Korea

15.4

55.1

2.1

27.4

Romania

21.2

51.5

6.3

21.0

Saudi Arabia

4.2

89.2

1.2

5.4

Serbia

13.6

48.5

7.3

30.7

Slovak Republic

22.6

47.7

2.3

27.4

Slovenia

35.7

31.3

2.5

30.5

South Africa

7.9

67.3

4.5

20.3

Spain

38.5

45.6

2.5

13.4

Sweden

33.1

41.0

6.1

19.8

Switzerland

38.4

52.4

0.9

8.3

Taiwan

13.6

66.2

0.0

20.3

Togo

3.3

49.4

13.7

33.7

Tunisia

6.9

52.5

15.5

25.1

United Arab Emirates

19.5

64.3

1.8

14.4

United Kingdom

34.0

50.5

0.0

15.5

United States

22.3

47.4

3.8

26.5

Uruguay

16.1

56.7

4.9

22.3

Venezuela

4.9

70.7

3.4

21.0

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report239

Table A7. Business exits, and reason for exit (positive, negative [non-COVID] and
COVID-related), % of adults aged 18–64

Business exits

Positive

Negative,
not including
COVID-19
pandemic

Austria

3.7

1.7

1.4

0.4

Brazil

13.0

0.9

8.2

3.0

Canada

8.2

2.8

4.0

0.6

Chile

7.6

1.6

4.0

1.6

China

3.4

0.8

1.7

0.7

Colombia

6.4

0.7

3.3

2.3

Croatia

3.6

0.9

1.9

0.4

Cyprus

4.1

0.5

2.3

1.1

Egypt

9.8

0.8

7.3

1.7

France

3.6

1.3

1.9

0.2

Germany

5.2

1.8

2.8

0.5

Greece

2.0

0.4

1.4

0.1

Guatemala

7.2

1.1

3.7

1.5

Hungary

1.9

0.5

0.7

0.3

India

6.3

1.6

3.5

0.9

Indonesia

10.5

2.1

4.7

2.4

Iran

7.4

1.1

5.4

0.2

Israel

3.7

0.7

2.2

0.4

Japan

2.0

0.6

1.0

0.2

Latvia

3.9

0.6

2.3

0.5

Lithuania

4.2

0.9

2.4

0.4

Luxembourg

4.5

1.9

1.8

0.2

Mexico

9.5

1.0

5.9

2.5

Morocco

4.3

0.2

3.2

0.8

Netherlands

5.6

2.3

2.7

0.4

Norway

1.6

0.4

0.7

0.1

Oman

11.2

1.1

6.3

3.4

Panama

11.1

1.0

5.7

4.4

Poland

3.7

0.9

0.7

2.2

240

COVID-19
pandemic

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

Business exits

Positive

Negative,
not including
COVID-19
pandemic

Puerto Rico

3.7

0.5

1.7

0.9

Qatar

9.1

1.8

4.8

1.9

Republic of Korea

3.5

0.3

3.1

0.2

Romania

1.6

0.4

0.9

0.2

Saudi Arabia

11.5

5.2

6.0

0.2

Serbia

3.7

1.1

2.1

0.2

Slovak Republic

5.3

1.1

2.3

1.2

Slovenia

2.5

0.7

1.1

0.4

South Africa

4.9

0.3

3.1

1.2

Spain

2.5

0.7

1.5

0.2

Sweden

4.1

1.5

1.8

0.1

Switzerland

2.2

0.9

0.9

0.3

Taiwan

1.9

0.7

0.8

0.3

Togo

9.7

0.5

7.4

0.9

Tunisia

8.8

0.5

6.3

1.1

United Arab Emirates

14.6

3.4

8.1

1.9

United Kingdom

2.8

0.9

1.1

0.5

United States

9.1

2.7

4.3

1.1

Uruguay

9.8

1.8

5.9

1.3

Venezuela

5.3

0.1

3.5

0.7

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

COVID-19
pandemic

241

Table A8.

Entrepreneurial expectations and scope (% of adults aged 18–64)

Job creation expectations

The % of adults(aged 18–64)
starting or
running a new
business andanticipating
25% or more
revenue fromoutside theircountry

New totheir area

New totheir
country

New tothe world

The % of adults starting a new
business with products orservices that are either new
to their area, new to theircountry or new to the world

0 jobs

1–5 jobs

6 or
more
jobs

Austria

4.1

1.6

1.1

1.2

1.1

0.5

0.3

Brazil

6.2

7.4

6.4

0.4

3.0

0.4

0.1

Canada

9.2

4.2

3.1

3.0

4.2

2.2

0.9

Chile

4.6

14.4

8.0

0.1

8.6

3.4

2.6

China

3.1

1.7

1.2

0.1

0.9

0.2

0.1

Colombia

5.8

14.6

7.6

1.2

5.7

0.6

0.3

Croatia

5.6

4.2

3.4

2.7

2.6

1.6

0.7

Cyprus

1.8

3.8

2.7

1.7

0.7

1.4

0.7

Egypt

2.9

2.0

1.7

0.1

1.0

0.1

0.0

France

3.6

3.1

2.4

1.1

1.7

0.9

0.8

Germany

6.2

1.7

1.2

1.7

3.1

0.8

0.6

Greece

1.8

2.1

1.0

0.9

0.7

0.8

0.1

Guatemala

4.6

16.2

8.6

1.8

8.8

1.1

0.4

Hungary

4.5

3.6

1.7

1.0

1.0

0.7

0.4

India

4.7

5.0

1.7

0.2

2.6

0.6

0.2

Indonesia

5.2

1.6

1.3

0.3

1.4

0.1

0.0

Iran

5.4

5.5

5.5

0.5

2.2

1.5

0.5

Israel

5.3

1.7

1.7

1.3

1.1

0.4

0.6

Japan

3.5

1.7

1.1

0.4

1.4

0.9

0.4

Latvia

6.1

4.6

3.5

3.2

0.8

1.5

0.5

Lithuania

5.4

4.1

3.2

2.2

1.0

0.9

0.6

Luxembourg

2.5

1.8

2.7

1.7

0.9

1.5

0.7

Mexico

2.2

7.6

3.1

0.5

3.5

0.7

0.3

Morocco

1.5

1.6

1.2

0.2

0.5

0.1

0.0

Netherlands

6.0

3.9

2.5

2.7

2.4

1.3

0.7

242

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

The % of adults starting or running a new
business using technology or processes
that are either new to their area, newto their country or new to the world

The % of adults starting or running a new
business having customers only within
their local area, only within their country,
and those having international customers

New totheir area

New to theircountry

New to theworld

Local only

National

International

0.9

0.3

0.3

2.1

1.9

2.5

3.4

0.5

0.2

9.8

8.7

1.3

3.5

2.1

0.3

5.8

4.8

4.7

6.6

2.6

1.5

20.3

6.2

0.5

0.7

0.3

0.1

3.3

2.3

0.2

5.1

0.6

0.4

12.7

9.5

3.9

2.8

1.8

0.5

3.1

3.9

6.0

1.0

1.4

0.8

1.6

3.2

3.4

1.0

0.1

0.0

2.4

3.4

0.4

1.7

0.8

0.9

3.0

2.8

3.1

2.5

1.4

0.5

2.8

3.0

2.5

0.7

0.7

0.0

1.6

1.1

2.0

9.5

1.3

0.7

14.8

11.0

3.2

1.6

0.4

0.5

2.8

4.5

2.6

2.0

0.6

0.2

9.0

1.6

0.3

1.4

0.0

0.0

4.6

2.2

0.4

2.0

1.2

0.5

3.6

9.3

2.9

0.6

0.6

0.6

1.8

4.5

2.2

1.2

1.2

0.5

1.4

3.2

1.3

0.7

1.3

0.4

1.7

6.3

6.1

0.8

1.2

0.5

2.3

5.2

4.9

0.8

0.5

0.5

0.7

2.3

3.6

3.8

0.5

0.5

7.1

3.8

1.2

0.4

0.1

0.0

2.2

1.5

0.4

2.2

1.4

0.8

2.2

5.1

4.8

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report243

Table A8 (continued)

Job creation expectations

The % of adults(aged 18–64)
starting or
running a new
business andanticipating
25% or more
revenue fromoutside theircountry

New totheir area

New totheir
country

New tothe world

The % of adults starting a new
business with products orservices that are either new
to their area, new to theircountry or new to the world

0 jobs

1–5 jobs

6 or
more
jobs

Norway

2.5

2.5

1.5

0.7

0.7

0.5

0.5

Oman

8.2

1.7

1.7

0.7

1.7

0.7

0.1

Panama

2.5

14.1

11.2

1.0

5.4

2.4

0.7

Poland

0.2

1.1

0.3

0.1

0.2

0.1

0.0

Puerto Rico

3.7

10.1

6.3

1.7

3.4

2.4

1.5

Qatar

2.5

1.9

6.2

1.1

2.0

1.1

0.9

Republic of
Korea

2.4

5.6

4.0

0.6

1.1

1.9

0.4

Romania

2.7

3.6

2.0

1.1

1.3

0.4

0.0

Saudi Arabia

3.9

10.8

4.5

1.0

4.6

0.8

0.1

Serbia

3.8

5.4

1.3

0.7

1.1

0.3

0.0

SlovakRepublic

7.6

2.5

0.7

1.2

2.3

1.3

0.5

Slovenia

3.1

3.6

1.3

1.8

0.8

1.0

0.9

South Africa

2.3

4.3

1.8

1.6

2.4

0.3

0.0

Spain

3.3

2.0

0.6

0.6

0.9

0.5

0.3

Sweden

5.5

2.3

1.3

1.3

1.0

0.7

0.6

Switzerland

3.9

2.7

0.8

0.9

1.5

0.6

0.7

Taiwan

2.0

1.5

2.1

0.5

0.7

0.5

0.3

Togo

9.6

10.5

4.0

2.1

1.8

0.2

0.3

Tunisia

6.4

7.1

3.7

1.0

3.0

0.3

0.0

United ArabEmirates

2.7

3.2

19.6

8.7

3.9

4.3

2.3

UnitedKingdom

5.8

4.5

2.5

1.6

1.7

0.8

0.5

United States

9.2

5.4

4.7

2.8

3.3

2.3

1.9

Uruguay

10.2

9.7

6.4

1.1

4.9

2.1

0.9

Venezuela

4.7

9.1

2.1

0.5

2.5

0.4

0.6

244

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report

The % of adults starting or running a new
business using technology or processes
that are either new to their area, newto their country or new to the world

The % of adults starting or running a new
business having customers only within
their local area, only within their country,
and those having international customers

New totheir area

New to theircountry

New to theworld

Local only

National

International

0.2

0.4

0.4

1.9

2.4

2.0

1.5

0.5

0.0

2.7

5.7

3.1

6.0

2.2

0.5

8.1

16.5

2.8

0.2

0.1

0.1

1.0

0.5

0.1

3.3

2.8

1.3

2.1

10.9

6.4

1.8

1.1

0.8

2.2

4.7

2.8

0.7

1.4

0.2

1.1

8.2

2.3

1.1

0.3

0.1

3.6

3.4

1.3

5.1

1.1

0.1

10.0

5.7

3.4

0.8

0.5

0.0

4.6

4.1

1.6

2.1

1.1

0.1

3.5

3.5

2.7

0.7

1.5

1.1

1.0

2.7

4.3

2.3

0.2

0.1

5.0

1.5

1.7

0.8

0.5

0.2

2.3

1.8

1.7

0.8

0.6

0.5

1.8

3.8

2.6

1.2

0.6

0.5

2.0

2.6

2.3

0.7

0.7

0.4

1.4

2.6

1.5

1.0

0.3

0.3

9.8

10.2

3.6

2.8

0.6

0.0

6.7

7.3

2.6

4.4

4.9

2.3

4.5

7.2

13.2

1.2

0.9

0.3

3.3

5.9

3.3

3.3

1.8

2.2

6.3

6.9

5.1

4.6

1.7

1.0

10.1

11.2

3.7

2.3

0.5

0.3

9.3

4.2

1.6

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report245

Table A9. The motivation to start a business (% of Total early-stage Entrepreneurial
Activity who somewhat or strongly agree)“To make adifference inthe world”“To build great
wealth or very
high income”“To continue
a family
tradition”“To earn aliving because
jobs arescarce”

Austria

37.9

37.4

19.1

46.0

Brazil

75.2

64.3

44.1

82.0

Canada

64.1

65.8

38.1

58.5

Chile

55.1

54.7

27.9

69.6

China

14.7

60.9

27.2

60.3

Colombia

47.6

54.0

34.5

86.6

Croatia

40.8

48.8

26.7

70.2

Cyprus

45.3

78.3

25.4

60.5

Egypt

58.7

71.9

52.6

84.8

France

23.7

42.3

22.2

42.6

Germany

42.8

47.8

32.9

47.2

Greece

23.5

56.7

39.6

63.6

Guatemala

80.9

78.5

52.4

89.1

Hungary

66.9

37.0

21.6

57.9

India

80.9

69.0

68.6

78.0

Indonesia

48.5

81.6

31.0

80.6

Iran

34.9

85.1

22.8

69.9

Israel

33.4

77.7

16.5

50.9

Japan

31.9

41.1

26.5

37.1

Latvia

29.3

40.4

22.6

63.9

Lithuania

40.8

46.5

24.0

66.6

Luxembourg

55.8

48.3

37.6

47.0

Mexico

68.2

51.4

53.1

86.9

Morocco

13.5

61.2

19.5

82.5

Netherlands

46.8

45.8

24.6

39.4

Norway

48.0

46.1

22.9

30.4

Oman

32.8

75.1

36.9

73.2

Panama

68.5

59.5

45.7

85.0

Poland

16.7

47.6

14.4

73.1

246

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report“To make adifference inthe world”“To build great
wealth or very
high income”“To continue
a family
tradition”“To earn aliving because
jobs arescarce”

Puerto Rico

70.6

48.6

29.5

67.2

Qatar

46.9

82.0

32.5

59.9

Republic of Korea

8.4

79.2

4.6

27.1

Romania

81.7

74.3

41.3

71.1

Saudi Arabia

64.6

87.3

61.9

85.2

Serbia

21.6

43.4

22.6

81.0

Slovak Republic

29.2

36.5

29.9

78.8

Slovenia

50.2

57.0

29.8

57.4

South Africa

80.4

80.8

49.2

89.5

Spain

39.3

39.1

21.4

70.6

Sweden

44.0

52.1

16.3

24.9

Switzerland

57.4

37.1

11.2

47.1

Taiwan

53.6

49.5

24.0

30.8

Togo

52.4

83.3

30.3

81.3

Tunisia

31.8

56.2

33.3

89.7

United Arab Emirates

54.8

69.5

34.4

65.3

United Kingdom

51.9

61.1

18.7

60.6

United States

69.3

70.8

36.5

54.5

Uruguay

40.5

46.1

27.2

65.4

Venezuela

53.1

62.5

33.0

89.9

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report247

Table A10. National Entrepreneurship Context Index and number of Entrepreneurial
Framework Conditions (EFCs) scored as sufficient or better (score ≥5)

Income level

Number of Entrepreneurial
Framework Conditions(EFCs) scored as
sufficient or better (≥5)

NECI score

Argentina

Level B3

3.7

Austria

Level A

5

4.8

BrazilLevel C2

3.6

CanadaLevel A

7

5.1

Chile

Level B

6

4.5

China (PRC)

Level C9

5.6

Colombia

Level C5

4.5

Croatia

Level B3

4.1

CyprusLevel A

4

4.3

Egypt

Level C4

4.3

FranceLevel A8

5.1

Germany

Level A

6

5.1

GreeceLevel B3

4.6

GuatemalaLevel C4

3.8

Hungary

Level B

4

4.7

India

Level C13

6.1

Indonesia

Level C

11

5.8

Iran

Level C1

3.6

IsraelLevel A

8

5.5

Italy

Level A

2

4.2

Japan

Level A5

5

LatviaLevel B

10

5.5

Lithuania

Level A

12

5.8

Luxembourg

Level A

7

5

MexicoLevel B3

3.8

MoroccoLevel C2

4.3

Netherlands

Level A

13

5.9

NorwayLevel A

7

5.2

Oman

Level B

1

4.2

248

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportIncome level

Number of Entrepreneurial
Framework Conditions(EFCs) scored as
sufficient or better (≥5)

NECI score

PanamaLevel B3

4.3

PolandLevel B2

3.8

Puerto Rico

Level B

1

3.8

Qatar

Level A11

5.7

Republic of Korea

Level A10

5.7

Romania

Level B3

4.2

Saudi Arabia

Level A

11

6.3

SerbiaLevel B

5

4.6

Slovak Republic

Level B3

4.4

Slovenia

Level A

4

4.8

South Africa

Level C

0

4.1

Spain

Level A

3

4

SwedenLevel A

6

5

Switzerland

Level A11

5.8

TaiwanLevel B

12

6.2

Togo

Level C0

3.6

Tunisia

Level C0

3.7

United Arab Emirates

Level A13

7.2

United Kingdom

Level A5

4.7

United States

Level A

6

5.2

Uruguay

Level B5

4.5

Venezuela

Level C

2

3.2

5

4.8

GEM total

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report249

GEM Global Sponsor
BABSON COLLEGE
Babson College is a founding institution and sponsor of the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM).
Located in Wellesley, Massachusetts, USA, with hub locations in Boston and Miami, Babson isrecognized internationally as a leader in entrepreneurship education.
Ranked No. 1 in entrepreneurship education for 26 consecutive years by US News & World Report,
Babson is the first to understand that thinking and acting entrepreneurially is more than just an
inclination. It can be taught. And Babson does it better than anyone.
Babson grants BS degrees through its innovative undergraduate program, and offers MBA and MS
degrees, as well as certificate programs through its F.W. Olin Graduate School of Business.
Babson Executive Education and the Babson Academy for the Advancement of Global
Entrepreneurial Learning also help drive growth and innovation at organizations and otheruniversities all around the world.
At Babson, we believe that entrepreneurship is the most powerful force in creating great economic
and social value everywhere.
The College’s student body is globally diverse, representing 77 countries and speaking more than
50 languages. Twenty-nine per cent of undergraduates and 39% of graduates are international. An
additional 7% and 9% hold dual passports, respectively.
One hundred per cent of Babson students take entrepreneurship courses. A broad variety ofentrepreneurship topics are taught by 25 tenured or tenure-track entrepreneurship faculty, all having
practical startup experience, and by 22 highly accomplished entrepreneurs, investors and businessleaders serving as adjunct faculty. In addition, entrepreneurship is integrated throughout the
curriculum across all business and liberal arts disciplines.
As the educator, convener and thought leader for Entrepreneurship of All Kinds®, Babson College
shapes the entrepreneurial leaders our world needs most: those with strong functional knowledge andthe skills and vision to navigate change, accommodate ambiguity, surmount complexity, and motivate
teams in a common purpose to create sustainable economic and social value in organizations of all
types and sizes.
Besides GEM, Babson has co-founded and continues to sponsor the Babson College
Entrepreneurship Research Conference (BCERC), the largest academic research conference focused
exclusively on entrepreneurship, as well as the Successful Transgenerational Entrepreneurship Project(STEP) — a global family business research project. Babson is home to The Diana Project™, which
engages in research activities, forums and scholarship focusing on women entrepreneurs and their
growth.
For more information, visit www.babson.edu.

250

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportReport Sponsors
CARTIER WOMEN’S INITIATIVEThe Cartier Women’s Initiative is an annual international entrepreneurshipprogram which aims to drive change by empowering women impact
entrepreneurs. Founded in 2006, the program is open to women-run andwomen-owned businesses from any country and sector that aim to have astrong and sustainable social and/or environmental impact.
At the heart of the Cartier Women’s Initiative is the vision of a world
where every woman impact entrepreneur can realize her full potential. To
reach this vision, obtaining and monitoring hard data related to the stateof women’s entrepreneurship is critical in enrolling more support into theecosystem and to drive collaboration. Cartier Women’s Initiative partneredwith GEM as it was in search of a partner to track, monitor and assess women
entrepreneurship activities.

THE SCHOOL OF MANAGEMENT FRIBOURG
The School of Management Fribourg (HEG-FR) is a bilingual public businessschool located in Fribourg, Switzerland, and a member of the University ofApplied Sciences and Arts of Western Switzerland (HES-SO). Its Institute of
Small and Medium Enterprises houses the Swiss chapter of GEM research,which is headed by Professor Rico Baldegger, PhD, in collaboration withother colleagues such as those at SUPSI Manno in Ticino, Switzerland.
One of the forerunners in Switzerland for training and interdisciplinary
research in the area of entrepreneurship and SMEs (small and medium
enterprises), the School of Management Fribourg has a particularthematic interest in research on women’s entrepreneurship and impacts ofentrepreneurship on the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global Report251

Sponsor GEM

Most stakeholders want to advance entrepreneurial activity. But it is difficult to makeinformed decisions without having the right data. Global Entrepreneurship Monitor fills
this void. Watch this short video to learn why many organizations — such as Babson
College, Cartier Women’s Initiative, Fribourg School of Management, Shopify and the
Women Entrepreneurs Finance Initiative — sponsor GEM, the world’s longest-runningstudy of entrepreneurship. (Click on the image or go to https://www.youtube.com/
watch?v=UAFWuMSUxJE.)

252

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2022/2023 Global ReportGlobal Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) is a consortium of nationalcountry teams, primarily associated with top academic institutions,that carries out survey-based research on entrepreneurship aroundthe world. GEM is the only global research source that collects dataon entrepreneurship directly from individual entrepreneurs. GEM’s
Adult Population Survey (APS) provides analysis on the characteristics,
motivations and ambitions of individuals starting businesses, as well associal attitudes towards entrepreneurship. The National Expert Survey(NES) looks at the national context in which individuals start businesses.
The unique GEM tools and data benefit numerous stakeholder groups:• Academics are able to apply unique approaches to studying
entrepreneurship at the national level;• Policymakers are able to make better-informed decisions to help
their entrepreneurial ecosystems thrive;• Entrepreneurs have better know­ledge on where to invest andinfluence;• Sponsors collaborate with GEM to advance their organizational
interests;• International organizations leverage the entrepreneurial insightsfrom GEM through reports and events.
In numbers, GEM is:• 24 years of data;• 3,600,000+ GEM Adult Population Survey interviews since 1999;• 173,000+ respondents in the 2022 Adult Population Survey;• 2,000+ expert interviews for the 2022 GEM National Expert Survey;• 120+ economies since 1999;• 370+ specialists in entrepreneurship research (GEM National Team
members);• 300+ academic and research institutions;• 200+ funding institutions;• 1,000+ publications in peer reviewed journals.
GEM began in 1999 as a joint project between Babson College (USA) andLondon Business School (UK). The consortium has become the richest
resource of information on entrepreneurship, publishing a range ofglobal, national and “special topic” reports on an annual basis.