sons such as illness makes restart more unlikely, while OTHERREAS, i.e., unspecified
other reasons, is insignificant, thus having no impact. If an argument within the entre-
preneurial team was a reason for business closure, this seems - for logical reasons - to
encourage entrepreneurs to venture anew; the effect of QUARREL is significantly positive.
Table 3: Probit estimation results
|
Independent variable: Occurrence of restart (yes/no) |
Specification I |
Specification II | ||
|
Marginal effect a |
P-value | |||
|
Marginal effect a |
P-value | |||
|
Main covariates I: Closure reasons b c | ||||
|
DEBTS |
-0,082 ** |
0,041 |
-0,061 |
0,143 |
|
NOTWORTH |
0,007 |
0,859 |
-0,001 |
0,988 |
|
ILLIQUIDITY |
0,012 |
0,723 |
0,027 |
0,463 |
|
WAGEEMPL |
0,036 |
0,634 |
0,036 |
0,639 |
|
RETIRE |
-0,247 *** |
0,000 |
-0,254 *** |
0,000 |
|
PRIVATE |
-0,106 ** |
0,044 |
-0,107 ** |
0,040 |
|
OTHERREAS |
0,038 |
0,374 |
0,038 |
0,372 |
|
QUARREL____________________________ |
0,193 *** |
0,000 |
0,192 *** |
0,000 |
|
Main covariates II: Bearer of financial losses b | ||||
|
Sharehol |
- |
- |
-0,017 |
0,645 |
|
BANKS |
- |
- |
-0,112 ** |
0,013 |
|
Otherstake________________________ |
- |
- |
0,024_________ |
0,573 |
|
Control variables | ||||
|
CAPITAL |
0,000 |
0,482 |
0,000 |
0,412 |
|
CAPITALM |
-0,010 |
0,771 |
-0,008 |
0,830 |
|
TEAM |
0,134 *** |
0,000 |
0,135 *** |
0,000 |
|
TEAMM |
0,005 |
0,946 |
-0,005 |
0,941 |
|
LIMITED |
0,161 *** |
0,000 |
0,158 *** |
0,000 |
|
SIZE |
0,003 *** |
0,001 |
0,003 *** |
0,001 |
|
SIZEM |
0,043 |
0,443 |
0,043 |
0,433 |
|
AGE |
-0,023 *** |
0,001 |
-0,022 *** |
0,001 |
|
AGEM |
-0,144 |
0,129 |
-0,154 |
0,108 |
|
EAST |
-0,037 |
0,237 |
-0,035 |
0,264 |
|
HTIND |
-0,006 |
0,961 |
-0,008 |
0,943 |
|
OTHERIND |
0,020 |
0,749 |
0,025 |
0,681 |
|
TECHSERV |
0,230 *** |
0,001 |
0,232 *** |
0,001 |
|
OTHERSERV |
0,131 * |
0,054 |
0,132 * |
0,051 |
|
CONSTRUCT |
0,107 ** |
0,034 |
0,111 ** |
0,027 |
|
TRADE______________________________ |
0,080 *_______ |
0,074 |
0,083 *________ |
0,063 |
|
# of observations |
853 |
853 | ||
|
Wald χ2 (df) |
146.820 (20) |
159.330 (27) | ||
|
Pseudo R2 |
0.161_________ |
0.168_________ | ||
a Average marginal effect.
b No reference category because multiple statements were possible.
c Actually, there is another closure reason indicator available namely “change into a different self-employment
business”. Since this indicator would completely determine the outcome in the regression, 13 observations
which exclusively refer to this closure reason are not used.
* Significant at the 10 % level. ** Significant at the 5 % level. *** Significant at the 1 % level.
Note: Both indictors variance inflation factor and condition number do not indicate a multicollinearity problem.
Source: Own regression based on the ZEW Entrepreneurship Study and the ZEW Foundation Panel.
More intriguing information
1. Explaining Growth in Dutch Agriculture: Prices, Public R&D, and Technological Change2. Plasmid-Encoded Multidrug Resistance of Salmonella typhi and some Enteric Bacteria in and around Kolkata, India: A Preliminary Study
3. Determinants of Household Health Expenditure: Case of Urban Orissa
4. Weak and strong sustainability indicators, and regional environmental resources
5. INTERACTION EFFECTS OF PROMOTION, RESEARCH, AND PRICE SUPPORT PROGRAMS FOR U.S. COTTON
6. The name is absent
7. Evidence of coevolution in multi-objective evolutionary algorithms
8. Pass-through of external shocks along the pricing chain: A panel estimation approach for the euro area
9. LOCAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES TO HELP FARM PEOPLE ADJUST
10. American trade policy towards Sub Saharan Africa –- a meta analysis of AGOA