A framework for investigating new firm entry:The (limited) overlap between informal-formal and necessity-opportunity entrepreneurship

Abstract

We analyse entrepreneurial entry along the dimensions of informal-formal and necessity-opportunity entrepreneurship, distinguishing between them yet considering them jointly. While the dominant view in the literature conflates necessity with informal entry, and opportunity with formal entry, we hypothesise that informal entrepreneurship may be attractive to higher-income individuals as a testing ground for entrepreneurial ideas. We also explain why higher-income individuals may undertake necessity entrepreneurship. We utilise individual Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) data from Chile (2019–2021), which identifies informal-formal and necessity-opportunity entrepreneurial entry modes, to test hypotheses on the role of individuals´ income in the four types of entrepreneurial entry. We also consider changes in entrepreneurial entry during a crisis and a non-crisis periods. Our results confirm that the patterns in the data are consistent with hypotheses derived from our proposed theoretical framework. Executive summary: Emerging markets economies have very large informal sectors, and their entrepreneurial entry is often motivated by economic necessity rather than by business opportunity. But neither informal nor necessity entrepreneurship are usually expected to generate the positive benefits for growth and development predicted for formal and opportunity entrepreneurship. We argue that the dominant stream in the literature actually conflates informal and necessity entrepreneurship, both of which have been associated with low human and financial capital and productivity. We propose that the appropriate typology is more complex than this because there are examples of successful and dynamic informal firms. This leads us to identify four categories of entrepreneurial entry: informal-necessity (Type 1), formal-opportunity (Type 2), informal-opportunity (Type 3), and formal-necessity (Type 4). While necessity entrepreneurship has typically been associated with low-income individuals, we propose that formal-necessity entrepreneurship may be an entry path for both low- and high-income individuals, though for different reasons. Informal opportunity entry may likewise be an option for people with low-income as well as high-income. We therefore seek to disentangle the analysis of opportunity-necessity and of formal-informal entry and to demonstrate that the two less explored entry modes - informal-opportunity, and formal-necessity - are of considerable theoretical and practical significance in emerging economies. We test our framework in the emerging market economy setting of Chile, one of the more prosperous and open economies in Latin America. We use Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) data which uniquely for Chile allow us to distinguish between individuals along both the formal-informal and the necessity-opportunity dimensions. On this basis, we distinguish empirically between these four categories of entrepreneurial entry and explain how higher-income individuals may use informal-opportunity entrepreneurial entry as a “seed bed” to test their new business ideas. At the same time, we show that necessity entrepreneurship may be attractive to both lower- and higher-income individuals. We also show that the interplay between individuals´ income groups and four entrepreneurial entry modes is stable over “normal times” versus “crisis periods”. We observe that in response to a crisis, individuals with lower-incomes are likely to engage more in informal-necessity entrepreneurship while opportunity-informal entry by higher-income individuals will decline. These changes represent a more complex adjustment pattern than has been identified for developed economies, where entrepreneurial activity has been found to be countercyclical. Thus, in emerging markets, informal-necessity entrepreneurship plays a stabilizing role for those individuals with a more marginal position in the labor market during the crisis. In contrast, for those individuals who have access to higher household income, all forms of entrepreneurship become a less attractive option. We interpret this as indicating that these individuals have the option to wait for higher return opportunities to re-emerge. This is one of the first papers to explore the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on entrepreneurship in an emerging market economy.