Scholarlink

<p>In a recent manuscript published in <i>Small Business Economics</i>, Professor Buckley sets forth important and intriguing arguments concerning (i) the hypothesis of a secular decline in entrepreneurship and (ii) a set of reasons that would explain the emergence of such persistent downward trends in entrepreneurial activity. While we are sympathetic to the act of posing crucial questions that defy received wisdom, there are important shortcomings in Buckley’s work that can be misleading to the inattentive reader. These problems involve conceptual fragilities (there seems to be a lack of rigor in the adopted definition of what entrepreneurship means) and, more importantly, a conspicuous lack of data analysis backing up his arguments. In this response, we address these shortcomings and provide two exhibits on the secular decline hypothesis based on data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and the Business Dynamics Statistics for the case of the USA. In exhibit I, global longitudinal evidence from Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (2000–2024) shows that entrepreneurial activity and perceptions remain largely stable worldwide, with scattered growth pockets and minimal decline, suggesting resilience rather than secular erosion of entrepreneurship as a socioeconomic function. In exhibit II, analyzing US Business Dynamics Statistics, we find no clear evidence for a generalized secular decline in entrepreneurship, instead revealing significant heterogeneity in absolute trends based on geographic granularity and sector. Our hope here is to deepen this timely and important debate for entrepreneurship scholars.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Seeing through the mist: why the narrative of a secular decline in entrepreneurship is premature

  • 期刊论文

  • 发表日期：

    2026年1月7日

查看全文
  • Bruno Fischer,
  • Angelica Pigola,
  • Pedro Henrique Napoli,
  • Gustavo Hermínio Salati Marcondes de Moraes

摘要

In a recent manuscript published in Small Business Economics, Professor Buckley sets forth important and intriguing arguments concerning (i) the hypothesis of a secular decline in entrepreneurship and (ii) a set of reasons that would explain the emergence of such persistent downward trends in entrepreneurial activity. While we are sympathetic to the act of posing crucial questions that defy received wisdom, there are important shortcomings in Buckley’s work that can be misleading to the inattentive reader. These problems involve conceptual fragilities (there seems to be a lack of rigor in the adopted definition of what entrepreneurship means) and, more importantly, a conspicuous lack of data analysis backing up his arguments. In this response, we address these shortcomings and provide two exhibits on the secular decline hypothesis based on data from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and the Business Dynamics Statistics for the case of the USA. In exhibit I, global longitudinal evidence from Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (2000–2024) shows that entrepreneurial activity and perceptions remain largely stable worldwide, with scattered growth pockets and minimal decline, suggesting resilience rather than secular erosion of entrepreneurship as a socioeconomic function. In exhibit II, analyzing US Business Dynamics Statistics, we find no clear evidence for a generalized secular decline in entrepreneurship, instead revealing significant heterogeneity in absolute trends based on geographic granularity and sector. Our hope here is to deepen this timely and important debate for entrepreneurship scholars.