Contributions to Management Science

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/1505

Nezameddin Faghih • Mohammad Reza ZaliEditors

Entrepreneurship Ecosystemin the Middle East and NorthAfrica (MENA)Dynamics in Trends, Policy and BusinessEnvironment

EditorsNezameddin FaghihChairholderUNESCO Chair in EntrepreneurshipParis, France

Mohammad Reza ZaliFaculty of EntrepreneurshipUniversity of TehranTehran, Iran

ISSN 1431-1941 ISSN 2197-716X (electronic)Contributions to Management ScienceISBN 978-3-319-75912-8 ISBN 978-3-319-75913-5 (eBook)https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-75913-5

Library of Congress Control Number: 2018940549

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018, Corrected Publication 2018, 2019,2020This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of thematerial is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or informationstorage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodologynow known or hereafter developed.The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publicationdoes not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevantprotective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in thisbook are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors orthe editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for anyerrors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictionalclaims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AGThe registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland

This book is dedicated to the memory ofRokneddin Faghih (1926–2000), a cherishedphilanthropist devoted to promotingentrepreneurship in a corner of the MENARegion: Estahban (Fars, Iran), the land of figsand saffron.

Acknowledgements

Sincere gratitude and special thanks are due to Dr. Mohammad Naghavi for hiswonderful efforts and fantastic diligence in the process of English language editingof most chapters of the book.

The editors are very grateful to all chapter authors as without their efforts, supportand generous contributions, this contributed volume would not have been possible.We would also like to express our gratitude to Ms. Maryam Karimzadeh, forhandling administrative assistance and correspondence, and those who have devotedtheir time, effort, support and generosity in the double-blind peer review process:Dr. Zahra Arasti, Dr. Afsaneh Bagheri, Dr. Stephen Hill, Dr. Victoria Hill,Dr. Mojtaba Sajadi, Dr. Kamal Sakhdari and Dr. Babak Ziyae.

vii

Disclaimers

Facts, information, opinions, views, findings, conclusions, comments, positions andstrategies expressed by the contributors and chapter authors are theirs alone and donot necessarily reflect the views, opinions, positions or strategies of the editors ofthis contributed volume and do not constitute endorsement or approval by theeditors. Authors and contributors are responsible for their citing of sources and theaccuracy of their references and bibliographies. The editors of this book cannot beheld responsible for any errors or for any consequences arising from the use of theinformation contained in the chapters or any lack or possible violations of thirdparties’ rights. Although every effort is made by the editors to see that no inaccurateor misleading data, opinion or statements appear in this contributed volume, thedata, their use and interpretations and opinions appearing in the chapters are thesole responsibility of the authors and contributors concerned. The editors accept noliability whatsoever for the consequences of any such inaccurate or misleading data,information, opinion or statements.

ix

Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1Nezameddin Faghih and Mohammad Reza Zali

Part I Institutional Environment and Entrepreneurs’ Motivationsin MENA

In Search of the Ideal Entrepreneurial Ecosystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11Shahamak Rezaei, Victoria Hill, and Yipeng Liu

Institutions and Entrepreneurship in MENA Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Ali Hussein Samadi

Entrepreneurial National Efficiency Based on GEM Data: Benchmarksfor the MENA Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95Nezameddin Faghih, M. Reza Zali, and Narges Vafaei

Increasing Entrepreneurial Impact in the MENA Region . . . . . . . . . . . 113Victoria Hill, Shahamak Rezaei, and Silvia Carolina Lopez Rocha

An Exploration into How Terrorism Impacts Business Environmentin MENA Region . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167Hamid Padash and Bahman Khodapanah

Social Entrepreneurship Strategies by the Middle Eastern Governments:A Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189Amir Forouharfar

Entrepreneurial Ecosystem and Performance in Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265Ali Davari and Amer Dehghan Najmabadi

Entrepreneurial Ecosystems in Arabic Countries:A Recent Overview . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283Alicia Coduras, Ignacio de la Vega, and Mohammad Bin Salman

xi

Part II Gender and Entrepreneurship in MENA

Gender and Entrepreneurship: Recent Developmentsin MENA (Middle East and North Africa) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305Stephen Hill and Elie Akhrass

Explaining the Gender Gap in Entrepreneurial Propensity . . . . . . . . . . 327Sana’ Kamal and Yousef Daoud

Insights from Female Entrepreneurs in MENA Countries: Barriersand Success Factors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351Catherine Laffineur, Mohsen Tavakoli, Alain Fayolle, Neila Amara,and Monica Carco

The Impact of Age and Entrepreneurial Age-Based Self-Imageon Entrepreneurial Competencies of Male and Female:Evidence of GEM-Iran 2016 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 399Mohammad Reza Zali, Nezameddin Faghih, Parvaneh Gelard,and Roya Molaei

The Role of Culture and Gender in E-commerce Entrepreneurship:Three Jordanian Case Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 419D. Qasim, A. Bany Mohammed, and F. Liñán

Regional Disparities in Entrepreneurship in Turkey with Respectto Gender Using a Regression of Pooling Cross Sections: 2006–2015 . . . 433Esra Karadeniz and Ahmet Özçam

A Study on Micro Women Entrepreneurs in UAE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449A. Srinivasa Rao

Part III Entrepreneurship and Economic Development in MENA

The Effect of Entrepreneurship on Economic Growth:A Panel Approach in MENA Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 479Ebru Tomris Aydoğan and Ayşe Sevencan

The Innovation-Based Competitive Advantage in Oman’s Transitionto a Knowledge-Based Economy: Dynamics of Innovation for Promotionof Entrepreneurship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 491Mahshid Sazegar, Amir Forouharfar, Victoria Hill, and NezameddinFaghih

Dynamics of Entrepreneurship in Egypt: Assessing the EntrepreneurialEcosystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 519Dina M. Mansour, Silvia Rita Sedita, and Roberta Apa

xii Contents

Lessons from Abu Dhabi: The Road Towards an InnovativeEntrepreneurial Economy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 543Thomas Andersson and Piero Formica

Part IV SMEs in MENA

Effectuation, Causation and the Revised Uppsala Model:A Behavioral Analysis of Iranian SMEs’ Internationalization . . . . . . . . 567Kamal Sakhdari and Shima Saniei

Entrepreneurial Competencies of SME Owners: A ComparativeExploratory Analysis Between Iran and Italy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 591Afsaneh Bagheri and Emidia Vagnoni

Management of Innovation in Micro, Small and Medium Enterprisesin the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 611Nomita Sharma

Part V A Comparative Study on the State of Women Entrepreneurshipin the ECO Region: Women Entrepreneurial Intentions andMotivations in Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey

Business Environment in the Three Countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 639Leyla Sarfaraz, Sarfraz A. Mian, Emine Esra Karadeniz,Mohammad Reza Zali, and Muhammad Shahid Qureshi

Women Entrepreneurship in Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey,Based on GEM Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 649Leyla Sarfaraz, Sarfraz A. Mian, Emine Esra Karadeniz,Mohammad Reza Zali, and Muhammad Shahid Qureshi

Do Financial, Human, Social and Cultural Capital Matter? . . . . . . . . . . 659Leyla Sarfaraz, Sarfraz A. Mian, Emine Esra Karadeniz,Mohammad Reza Zali, and Muhammad Shahid Qureshi

Female Entrepreneurship, Internationalization,and Trade Liberalization in Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . 677Leyla Sarfaraz, Sarfraz A. Mian, Emine Esra Karadeniz,Mohammad Reza Zali, and Muhammad Shahid Qureshi

Conclusion and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 691Leyla Sarfaraz, Sarfraz A. Mian, Emine Esra Karadeniz,Mohammad Reza Zali, and Muhammad Shahid Qureshi

Correction to: The Impact of Age and Entrepreneurial Age-BasedSelf-Image on Entrepreneurial Competencies of Male and Female:Evidence of GEM-Iran 2016 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . E1

Contents xiii

Correction to: The Impact of Age and Entrepreneurial Age-BasedSelf-Image on Entrepreneurial Competencies of Male and Female:Evidence of GEM-Iran 2016 Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C3

Correction to: Social Entrepreneurship Strategies by the MiddleEastern Governments: A Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . C5

Correction to: Entrepreneurial Competencies of SME Owners:A Comparative Exploratory Analysis Between Iran and Italy . . . . . . . . C7

xiv Contents

List of Contributors

Elie Akhrass UK Lebanon TechHub, Beirut, Lebanon

Neila Amara United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO),Vienna, Austria

Thomas Andersson Ithraa, Muscat, Oman

Roberta Apa Department of Economics and Management, University of Padova,Padova, Italy

Ebru Tomris Aydoğan Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey

Afsaneh Bagheri Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

A. Bany Mohammed Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales,Universidad de Sevilla, Seville, Spain

Monica Carco United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO),Vienna, Austria

Alicia Coduras Instituto Opinometre, Barcelona, Spain

GERA, Shiloh, VA, USA

Yousef Daoud Master Program in Economics, Birzeit University, Birzeit, Palestine

MDE Program, Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, Al-Daayen, Qatar

Ali Davari Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Ignacio de la Vega Babson Global Center for Entrepreneurial Leadership,Wellesley, MA, USA

Nezameddin Faghih UNESCO Chair in Entrepreneurship, Paris, France

Alain Fayolle Em Lyon Business School, Ecully, France

xv

Piero Formica Innovation Value Institute, Maynooth University, Kildare, Ireland

Amir Forouharfar Public Administration (HRM), University of Sistan andBaluchestan, Zahedan, Iran

Parvaneh Gelard Faculty of Management, Islamic Azad University, South TehranBranch, Tehran, Iran

Stephen Hill UK Lebanon TechHub, Beirut, Lebanon

Victoria Hill Faculty of Arts and Sciences, Department of Languages andContinuous Training, Moulay Ismail University, Meknes, Morocco

Sana’ Kamal Master Program in Economics, Birzeit University, Birzeit, Palestine

MDE Program, Doha Institute for Graduate Studies, Al-Daayen, Qatar

Emine Esra Karadeniz Department of Economics, Yeditepe University, GEMIstanbul, Istanbul, Turkey

Bahman Khodapanah University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Catherine Laffineur Côte d’Azur University – CNRS – GREDEG, Valbonne,France

F. Liñán Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad deSevilla, Seville, Spain

Yipeng Liu Newcastle University, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK

Dina M. Mansour Management Department, School of Business, Economics andInformatics, Birkbeck-University of London, London, UK

Sarfraz A. Mian State University of New York at Oswego, GEM Pakistan,Oswego, NY, USA

Roya Molaei Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Amer Dehghan Najmabadi Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran,Tehran, Iran

Ahmet Özçam Department of Economics, Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey

Hamid Padash Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

D. Qasim Facultad de Ciencias Económicas y Empresariales, Universidad deSevilla, Seville, Spain

Muhammad Shahid Qureshi Center for Entrepreneurial Development, IBA,GEM Pakistan, Karachi, Pakistan

Shahamak Rezaei Department of Social Sciences & Business, Roskilde Univer-sity, Roskilde, Denmark

xvi List of Contributors

Silvia Carolina Lopez Rocha Development Economics Vice Presidency, WorldBank Group, Washington, DC, USA

Kamal Sakhdari Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Mohammad Bin Salman College of Business & Entrepreneurship, KAEC, KingAbdullah Economic City, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia

Ali Hussein Samadi Department of Economics, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran

Shima Saniei Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Leyla Sarfaraz Shiraz University, GEM Iran, Shiraz, Iran

Mahshid Sazegar Fars Engineering Association, Shiraz, Iran

Silvia Rita Sedita Department of Economics and Management, University ofPadova, Padova, Italy

Ayşe Sevencan Yeditepe University, Istanbul, Turkey

Nomita Sharma Department of Management Studies, Keshav Mahavidyalaya,University of Delhi, Delhi, India

A. Srinivasa Rao Department of Management, Faculty Incharge—Centre forInnovation, Incubation & Entrepreneurship (CIIE), BITS Pilani, Dubai, UnitedArab Emirates

Mohsen Tavakoli Em Lyon Business School, Ecully, France

CERAG (Centre for Studies and applied Research in Management) – FRE 3748 –

CNRS, University of Grenoble-Alpes, Saint-Martin-d’Hères, France

Narges Vafaei Faculty of Entrepreneurship, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran

Emidia Vagnoni Department of Economics and Management, University ofFerrara, Ferrara, Italy

Mohammad Reza Zali Faculty of Entrepreneurship, The University of Tehran,GEM Tehran, Tehran, Iran

List of Contributors xvii

List of Figures

Chapter 1

Fig. 1 Total Early-stage entrepreneurial Activities (TEA) in someMENA countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Fig. 2 Financing for entrepreneurs in some MENA countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Chapter 2

Fig. 1 Stam’s definition of ecosystem configured as a versionof input-output diagram. Source: Authors’ own research basedon Stam (2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Fig. 2 Stam revised overview of entrepreneurial ecosystem. Source: Stam(2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Fig. 3 OECD-Eurostat Entrepreneurship Indicators Programme (EIP).Source: OECD (2016a, b) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Fig. 4 Babson College view of entrepreneurial ecosystem. Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20130426134347/http://entrepreneurial-revolution.com/an-ecosystem-approach/ (Available via the WorldWide Web accessed 11 January 2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29

Fig. 5 Isenberg view of entrepreneurial ecosystem. Source: http://web.archive.org/web/20130426134347/http://entrepreneurial-revolution.com/an-ecosystem-approach/ (Available via the World Wide Webaccessed 11 January 2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30

Fig. 6 Authors’ view of entrepreneurial ecosystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40

Chapter 3

Fig. 1 Determinants of entrepreneurship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63Fig. 2 Entrepreneurial Framework Condition (EFC) in some MENA

countries (2008–2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73Fig. 3 Institutional quality in some MENA countries: (1995–2016) . . . . . . . . . 77

xix

Fig. 4 Link between property rights and entrepreneurship in some factor-driven (and MENA) Countries: (2008–2014). (a) Opportunity Entre.and IPRI. 1: Angola, 2: Guatemala, 3: Iran, 4: Jamaica, 5: Uganda, 6:Algeria. (b) Opportunity Entre. and PPR. 1: Angola, 2: Guatemala, 3:Iran, 4: Jamaica, 5: Uganda, 6: Algeria. (c) Opportunity Entre. andIPR. 1: Angola, 2: Guatemala, 3: Iran, 4: Jamaica, 5: Uganda, 6:Algeria. (d) Necessity Entre. and IPRI. 1: Angola, 2: Guatemala, 3:Iran, 4: Jamaica, 5: Uganda, 6: Algeria. (e) Necessity Entre. and PPRin Factor-driven Countries. 1: Angola, 2: Guatemala, 3: Iran, 4:Jamaica, 5: Uganda, 6: Algeria. (f) Necessity Entre. and IPR inFactor-driven Countries. 1: Angola, 2: Guatemala, 3: Iran, 4:Jamaica, 5: Uganda, 6: Algeria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79

Fig. 5 Link between control of corruption and entrepreneurship in someMENA countries: (2008–2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85

Chapter 4

Fig. 1 Model of evaluating entrepreneurial national efficiency . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 99

Chapter 5

Fig. 1 The S-curve of entrepreneurship. Source: Ács, Szerb et al. (2017) . . 118Fig. 2 Opportunity TEA and GDP. Source: Ács, Szerb et al. (2017) . . . . . . . . 119Fig. 3 Worldwide unemployment of youths. Source: ILO, Trends

Econometric Models, April 2015; e=estimate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132Fig. 4 School governance versus science performance. Notes: Results based

on 70 education systems. Statistically significant correlationcoefficients are shown in a darker tone. Source: OECD, PISA 2015Database . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141

Chapter 6

Fig. 1 Terrorism targets from 1975 to 2015. Source: Knomea (2016) . . . . . . 173Fig. 2 MENA business share to terrorist targets from 1975 to 2015.

Source: Knomea (2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175Fig. 3 Terrorist attacks on business. Source: Knomea (2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175Fig. 4 Tourism share in MENAs terrorist target during the period of

1975–2015. Source: Knomea (2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181Fig. 5 Tourism target distribution in MENA countries during the period

of 1970–2015. Source: Knomea (2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181Fig. 6 The relationship between starting a business and terrorism

in MENA .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182Fig. 7 The relationship between electric power supply and terrorism

in MENA .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182Fig. 8 The relationship between paying taxes and terrorism in MENA . . . . . 183Fig. 9 The relationship between trading across borders and terrorism

in MENA .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183Fig. 10 The relationship between terrorism and business environment

in MENA .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184

xx List of Figures

Chapter 7

Fig. 1 Green leap strategic steps as “Entrepreneurial Judo” (Source:London and Hart 2011) (Printed with permission) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

Fig. 2 Prevalence of individuals in operational post-start-up SocialEntrepreneurial Activity (SEA-OP-BRD), by economy for fourME countries (Source: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015)(Note: The original figure by GEM (2015), consistedof 58 countries, the other countries except the ME ones areomitted in the figure by the author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202

Fig. 3 Comparative Social Entrepreneurial Activity (SEA) by phase andglobal region (Source: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015) . . . . . 204

Fig. 4 Comparative entrepreneurial activity in the operational phase:commercial, social (Broad measure) and overlap (Source: GlobalEntrepreneurship Monitor 2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205

Fig. 5 Comparative sources of funding used by nascent socialentrepreneurs (Source: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015) . . . . . 206

Fig. 6 Governmental engagement with SE (Source: Abdou et al. 2010) . . . . 206Fig. 7 The ME governments can benefit from three different organizations

to implement their SE strategies (Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 207Fig. 8 Youth unemployment rates in the world in 2008–2018 (Source:

OECD 2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211Fig. 9 Comparative youth unemployment in the world based on the

region and gender (Source: OECD 2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212Fig. 10 Displaced people by region, 2006–2015 (Source: Global

Humanitarian Assistance Report 2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232Fig. 11 Number of Refugees/Asylum Seekers in ME Countries Hosting

the Most Refugees/Asylum (Source: Global HumanitarianAssistance Report 2016) (Note: For better comparison, thenon-ME countries are deleted by the author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233

Fig. 12 Social progress index vs. GDP per capita for some ME countries in2016 (Source: http://www.socialprogressimperative.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/2016-GDP-SPI-plot.png) (Note: The figure ismodified by the author, the non-ME countries are omitted for bettercomparison) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240

Fig. 13 Male and female youth engagement in civic activities in MENA2012 (Source: Mercy Corps 2012) (Printed with permission) . . . . . . . . 241

Fig. 14 Governments’ views in formulating SE strategies (Note: TheOpened Door, Closed Door, Global Citizen and Country Citizenstrategies are coined by the author to explain each view) (Source:Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242

Fig. 15 Bahrain’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies (Source:Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244

Fig. 16 Egypt’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies (Source:Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 245

List of Figures xxi

Fig. 17 Potential future trend in the population of Iran’s pensioners inTamine Ejtemayee (Social Security Organization of Iran)(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246

Fig. 18 Iran’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247

Fig. 19 Iraq, Syria and Yemen’s governmental view in formulating SEstrategies (Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248

Fig. 20 Israel’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249

Fig. 21 Jordan’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 249

Fig. 22 Kuwait’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250

Fig. 23 Lebanon’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250

Fig. 24 Oman’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251

Fig. 25 Palestine (the West Bank and Gaza)‘s governmental view informulating SE strategies (Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 251

Fig. 26 Qatar’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 252

Fig. 27 Saudi’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253

Fig. 28 Turkey’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 253

Fig. 29 The UAE’s governmental view in formulating SE strategies(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254

Fig. 30 SE strategy formulation at the governmental level(Source: Author) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258

Chapter 8

Fig. 1 Conceptual model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273

Chapter 10

Fig. 1 GEM total early-stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA) rates bycategorised country, 2015. Source: GEM Global Report, 2015/16(n.b. while all surveyed countries are included in the chart, forbrevity not all are listed on the axis. Please see the GEM GlobalReport, (Kelley et al. 2016), for the full listing) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307

Fig. 2 The absolute gender gap in total early stage entrepreneurialactivity (TEA) in MENA, 2009–2016. Source: Tables 1, 3 and 4 . . . 317

xxii List of Figures

Chapter 11

Fig. 1 TEA rates (average 2008–2010 and 2012). Countries are orderedaccording to the total entrepreneurship activity (TEA) rates,decreasing from left to right . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331

Fig. 2 Fear of failure rates across countries for the period (averages2008–2010 and 2012). Countries are ordered according to fearof failure rates (total), decreasing from left to right . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338

Fig. 3 Skill perception rates across countries for the period (averages2008–2010 and 2012). Countries are ordered according to skillsperception rates (total), decreasing from left to right . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338

Fig. 4 Knowing other entrepreneurs’ rates across countries for the period(averages 2008–2010 and 2012). Countries are ordered accordingto knowing someone who started a business rates (total), decreasingfrom left to right . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338

Chapter 13

Fig. 1 Relationship between age and entrepreneurial behavior . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405Fig. 2 Categorizing self . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 407Fig. 3 Categorizing age . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408Fig. 4 The final model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416

Chapter 16

Fig. 1 Educational background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457Fig. 2 Importance of education in doing business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457Fig. 3 Is this first enterprise? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 457Fig. 4 Prior experience in this field of business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458Fig. 5 Formal entrepreneurial training at any time? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458Fig. 6 Support from family in doing business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 458Fig. 7 Standard organizational structure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459Fig. 8 Absence of the organizational structure is a challenge to growth

of the organization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459Fig. 9 Short term financing requirement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 459Fig. 10 Obstacles in getting finances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460Fig. 11 Having skilled manpower in Finance/Accounts function . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460Fig. 12 Absence of skilled finance person makes it difficult to manage

finances . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 460Fig. 13 Facing problem with delayed amount receivables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461Fig. 14 Costs of operation causing challenge to business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461Fig. 15 Demand for products/services reduced in recent times . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461Fig. 16 Company having skilled/qualified professional workers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462Fig. 17 Sources of recruiting new employees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462Fig. 18 Having competitive strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 462Fig. 19 Knowledge about competitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463

List of Figures xxiii

Fig. 20 Difficulties in getting resources/permissions from theGovernment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463

Fig. 21 Handling laws and regulations related to your business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 464Fig. 22 Use of marketing techniques for promoting business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 464Fig. 23 Effectiveness at negotiating with customers and suppliers . . . . . . . . . . . . 465Fig. 24 Mentoring support to grow business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 465Fig. 25 Face-to-face networking to help grow business . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 466Fig. 26 Challenges—(a) Dubai Emirate; (b) Fujairah Emirate; (c) Sharjah

Emirate; (d) Ajman Emirate; and (e) Abu Dhabi Emirate . . . . . . . . . . . . 467

Chapter 17

Fig. 1 Growth rates of the MENA countries (%), except Syria(1971–2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485

Fig. 2 GDP per capita growth (1971–2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 485Fig. 3 Relationships between self-employment and GDP and self-

employment and years of schooling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486

Chapter 18

Fig. 1 Framework for the Global Innovation Index (2017). Source: GlobalInnovation Index (2017: 11) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494

Fig. 2 Administrative strategy formulation process by the government ofOman. Source: Authors’ own work based on Supreme Council forPlanning website . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 498

Fig. 3 The research stages summarized as a flow chart. Source: Author’sown work . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 500

Fig. 4 Qatar’s GII (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 510Fig. 5 Qatar’s Rank for the GII (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 510Fig. 6 Qatar GII (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511Fig. 7 Qatar’s Innovation Output Index (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 511Fig. 8 Qatar’s Innovation Efficiency Index (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 512Fig. 9 Oman’s GII (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 512Fig. 10 Oman’s GII Rankings (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513Fig. 11 Oman’s Overall Input Index (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 513Fig. 12 Oman’s Innovation Output (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514Fig. 13 Oman’s Innovation Efficiency Index (2009–2017) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 514

Chapter 20

Fig. 1 Negative correlation between mineral exports and growth. Source:World Bank (2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 544

Fig. 2 Gross fixed capital formation by economic activity, per cent, 2014.Source: Ministry of Economy (2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 549

xxiv List of Figures

Chapter 21

Fig. 1 The entrepreneurial process model of internationalization . . . . . . . . . . . . 572Fig. 2 Effectuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 572Fig. 3 Research methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 575

Chapter 24

Fig. 1 Gender inequality index in Iran, Pakistan and Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 646Fig. 2 Literacy rate by gender in Iran, Pakistan and Turkey. Source:

UNESCO Institute for Statistics, National literacy rates for youths(15–24) and adults (15+), the data for Iran and Pakistan are from2008, and Turkey from 2009 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647

Chapter 25

Fig. 1 Labor force participation rate, female/male ratio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 654Fig. 2 Prevalence rates of early stage entrepreneurial activity (TEA)

in Iran, Pakistan and Iran. Source: GEM (2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 654Fig. 3 Necessity and opportunity motives for women and men. Source:

GEM (2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 655

Chapter 26

Fig. 1 Components of an individual’s capital. Double asterisks inartworks refers to aspects of cultural capital lie in both thepersonal and social categories . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 660

Fig. 2 World cultural map (1995–2009). Source: World Value Survey,World cultural map, (1995–2009). Available at: http://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/wvs.jsp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 671

Fig. 3 GEM framework, 2014 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 672

Chapter 27

Fig. 1 Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey compared in economic freedom(1995–2010). Source: Heritage Foundation 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681

Fig. 2 Trade freedom comparison among Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and theworld average. Source: Heritage Foundation and the Wall StreetJournal (2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 682

Fig. 3 International levels for female entrepreneurs in 54 economies,2008–2010. Source: GEM Women’s Report (2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 684

Fig. 4 Free trade scores in 54 GEM member countries, 2010. Source:Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal (2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 685

List of Figures xxv

List of Tables

Chapter 2

Table 1 GEM entrepreneurial framework conditions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Table 2 GEM entrepreneurial behaviour and attitudes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

Chapter 3

Table 1 Typology of institutions and entrepreneurship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58Table 2 Proxy variables for institutions and entrepreneurship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61Table 3 Factors influencing entrepreneurship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65Table 4 Cointegration and causality tests between institutional quality

and entrepreneurship in factor-driven countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78

Chapter 4

Table 1 Entrepreneurial national efficiency in GEM countries(efficient countries) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102

Table 2 Entrepreneurial national efficiency in GEM countries(non-efficient countries) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

Table 3 Benchmarked countries to improve entrepreneurial nationalefficiency (innovation-driven countries) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

Table 4 Summary of sensitivity analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106Table 5 Comparing entrepreneurial inputs and outputs

of Iran to Romania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110

Chapter 5

Table 1 Top 37 GEI scores plus 12 MENA countries’ compared withtheir IWCM scores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116

Table 2 GEI scores and sub-indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123Table 3 Fourteen Pillars compared to all MENA and to five selected

countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124Table 4 Hofstede cultural dimensions across MENA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130

xxvii

Table 5 Table of educational expenditures for selected MENA countriesand U.S. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134

Table 6 Average TIMSS eighth grade mathematics test scores 2015and 2011 for MENA and US .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138

Table 7 AACSB-accredited business schools . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150Table 8 ABET-accredited programmes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151Table 9 Youth (15–24 years) in MENA and in North America . . . . . . . . . . . . 153Table 10 GEM National Expert Survey for Entrepreneurial Education

in MENA and North America 2012 through 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155

Chapter 6

Table 1 Terrorism definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171Table 2 Incidence of terrorism in selected MENA countries

(2014–2015) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174Table 3 Terrorism and FDI fluctuation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 176Table 4 MENA countries’s rank in terrorism and FDI . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178Table 5 Empirical studies about the impact of terrorism on tourism

industry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180

Chapter 7

Table 1 The ME countries with the highest ranks based on 9 successiveyearly periods according to Global Competitiveness Report(GCR) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199

Table 2 Social entrepreneurship prevalence rates as percentage of theworking population in 2009, by ME Country and EnterpriseMaturity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201

Table 3 Social entrepreneurship prevalence rates as percentage of theadult population, by ME Country and Type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202

Table 4 Comparative socio-economic conditions for governmentalSE among the ME countries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238

Table 5 Summary of Paper’s Results for ME Governments’SE strategies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

Chapter 8

Table 1 Important factors involved in shaping entrepreneurialecosystem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 269

Table 2 Quality of measurement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274Table 3 Correlation between the variables . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274Table 4 Factor loading and T-values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 275Table 5 Mean, standard deviation, and coefficient of variation . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276Table 6 Simple linear regression . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277Table 7 Multiple linear regressions by Stepwise method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 277

xxviii List of Tables

Chapter 9

Table 1 Sample of GEM Arabic countries and the year of the NES’smost recent data collection . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288

Table 2 Research questions and statistical methods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 289Table 3 The most recent average scores on each key entrepreneurial

framework condition, at national level, for the sampleof 14 Arabic countries participating in GEM studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290

Table 4 Arabic countries grouped in four clusters that represent thefour average statuses of the entrepreneurial ecosystems’ mainfactors . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292

Table 5 Final coordinates (average scores) for the centroids of theformed clusters: profiles of the statuses of the Arabicecosystems classified into four groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293

Table 6 Results of the ANOVA (analysis of variance) test to determinewhich factors have discriminant power to classify the countriesin the four groups proposed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 293

Table 7 The distances between the four clusters of Arabic countriesformed, depending on the statuses of the main factors thatconfigure their entrepreneurial ecosystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294

Table 8 General similarities and distinctions between Arabic countriesregarding key factors of the entrepreneurial ecosystem . . . . . . . . . . . . 294

Table 9 Strengths and weaknesses of Arabic entrepreneurial ecosystemsgrouped in four clusters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 295

Chapter 10

Table 1 Rates of total early-stage entrepreneurial activity, (% TEA),by country, MENA 2009–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312

Table 2 Rates of total early-stage entrepreneurship, (% TEA), by stageof development, MENA 2009–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 314

Table 3 Rates of male total early-stage entrepreneurial activity,(% TEAm) by country, MENA 2009–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316

Table 4 Rates of female total early-stage entrepreneurial activity,(% TEAf) by country, MENA 2009–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 316

Table 5 Ratio of male to female total early-stage entrepreneurship,(TEAm/TEAf), by country, MENA 2009–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 318

Table 6 MENA averages for overall total early stage entrepreneurialactivity (TEA), and for men (TEAm), and women (TEAf), plusselected other countries and Regions, 2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 319

Table 7 MENA countries with statistically significant changes in Totalearly stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA), and in the male tofemale ratio (TEAm/TEAf, abbreviated to M/F) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322

List of Tables xxix

Chapter 11

Table 1 Variables used in the estimation of TEA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332Table 2 Probit estimates of the TEA equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 335Table 3 CMP regression results with TEA as dependent variable . . . . . . . . . . 341Table 4 Country fixed effects of the probit and CMP models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 343Table 5 Probit estimates with nascent as dependent variable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345Table 6 Bivariate probit regression results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346Table 7 CMP regression results with nascent as dependent variable . . . . . . . 347Table 8 Country fixed effects with nascent as dependent variable . . . . . . . . . 347

Chapter 12

Table 1 Socio-demographic characteristics of women entrepreneurs . . . . . . 357Table 2 Level of education of women entrepreneurs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 358Table 3 Access to a mentor (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 359Table 4 Motivations for starting a business (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . 359Table 5 Would you recommend entrepreneurship to other women?

(% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360Table 6 Percentage of businesses registered . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 360Table 7 Forms of female entrepreneurship (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361Table 8 Businesses by sector (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 361Table 9 Number of employees (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 362Table 10 Recruitment target (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363Table 11 Start-up financing (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 363Table 12 Percentage of export in sales revenue (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . 363Table 13 Percentage of businesses run by women involved in export,

as determined by business status and level of entrepreneur’seducation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364

Table 14 Business development in the years to come (% of respondents) . . . 365Table 15 Perceived impediments to entrepreneurship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 366Table 16 Improvements sought for entrepreneurship (% of respondents) . . . 366Table 17 Obstacles to starting a business (percentage of respondents) . . . . . . 367Table 18 Obstacles to growth (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 368Table 19 Perceived discrimination against women (% of respondents) . . . . . 369Table 20 Support for women in entrepreneurship . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369Table 21 Women’s perceptions of accessing finance (% of respondents) . . . 370Table 22 Perceived difficulty of being a women entrepreneur compared

to a male entrepreneur (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 370Table 23 Perceived management skills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 371Table 24 Perceived success factors for women . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 372Table 25 Equality of means test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373Table 26 Size of business, according to marital status and education . . . . . . . 374Table 27 Discrimination at the hiring stage (% of respondents) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 375Table 28 Correlation between business time in operation and

employment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 376

xxx List of Tables

Table 29 Size of business according to gender of associates and ownershipstructure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 377

Table 30 2014 Gender Inequality Index (Source: United Nations) . . . . . . . . . . 379Table 31 Percentage of women who pay themselves a regular salary . . . . . . . 380Table 32 Percentage of women entrepreneurs regularly able to derive

remuneration from their business, by degree and marital status . . . . 381Table 33 Time spent weekly in association networks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381Table 34 Entrepreneurial dedication . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 382Table 35 Percentage of educated and less educated women in multi- and

single-shareholder businesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 384Table 36 Percentage of educated and non-educated women in

family-owned and newly founded businesses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385Table 37 Experience in the business and level of education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 386Table 38 Entrepreneurial dedication, according to level of education,

ownership structure and status of premises . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 387Table 39 Entrepreneurial dedication, according to type of business

financing and level of education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 388

Chapter 13

Table 1 Iran population age distribution . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 400Table 2 Dependency ratios in Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 401Table 3 The pivotal ages of the world’s most successful entrepreneurs . . . 402Table 4 Variables and operational definitions and scale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 410Table 5 Cross-tabulation of gender and educational attainment . . . . . . . . . . . . 411Table 6 Cross tabulation of Gender and age range . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411Table 7 Entrepreneurial competencies of males and females . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 412Table 8 Gender and entrepreneurial competencies cross tabulation . . . . . . . . 412Table 9 Entrepreneurial age- based self-image of males and females . . . . . . 413Table 10 The importance of age and age-based self-image on male and

female entrepreneurial competencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415

Chapter 14

Table 1 Doing business report on starting a business 2017 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430

Chapter 15

Table 1 Estimation of being a tea entrepreneur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 439Table 2 Regional effects in entrepreneurial activity, and women

and men entrepreneurships across regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 440Table 3 Comparison of derivatives from the linear and the logistic

regression models . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 442

Chapter 16

Table 1 Emiratewise—Sectorwise Respondents’ data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 456

List of Tables xxxi

Chapter 17

Table 1 Descriptive statistics of regression variables, 1971–2014 . . . . . . . . . 484Table 2 Panel estimation of Eq. (1) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 487

Chapter 18

Table 1 Input and output indices which constitute the overall GII . . . . . . . . . 495Table 2 Oman’s annual GII scores for Overall Input Indices and Overall

Output Indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 495Table 3 Qatar’s annual GII scores for overall input indices and overall

output indices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 496Table 4 Oman’s strategic views on economy and entrepreneurship . . . . . . . . 497Table 5 Benchmarks of GII sub-indices for Oman and Qatar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 501Table 6 Oman’s GII-based SWOT matrix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509

Chapter 19

Table 1 Determinants of selected entrepreneurship measures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 521Table 2 Interviews classification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 527

Chapter 20

Table 1 Gross generalisation of characteristics for types of economies . . . . 551Table 2 GII ranking of GCC countries’ innovation systems,

2014–2016 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 552Table 3 WEF ranking of GCC countries’ innovation systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 553

Chapter 21

Table 1 Behaviors underlying selected internationalization models . . . . . . . . 576Table 2 Description of cases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 577Table 3 Causation behaviors based on Chandler et al. (2011) and Fisher

(2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579Table 4 Effectuation behaviors based on Chandler et al. (2011), Fisher

(2012) and Sarasvathy et al. (2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 579Table 5 Behaviors established upon the entrepreneurial process model

based on Schweizer et al. (2010) and Johanson andVahlne (2009) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 580

Chapter 22

Table 1 Literature on entrepreneurial competencies, their dimensionsand components . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 594

Table 2 Demographic information of SME owners in Iran and Italy . . . . . . 600Table 3 Means, standard deviations, and Cronbach’s alpha of

entrepreneurial competencies dimensions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 602Table 4 Test of significant mean differences in SME owners’

entrepreneurial competencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 603

xxxii List of Tables

Chapter 23

Table 1 Economic indicators in MENA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614Table 2 Contribution of MSMEs in MENA (percent) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615Table 3 Sector-wise distribution of MSMEs in MENA .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615

Chapter 24

Table 1 How Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey rank (out of 183 economies)on doing business 2012 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 640

Table 2 How Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey rank on doing business topics . . . 641Table 3 The ease of starting a business in Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and

the corresponding regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 641Table 4 Dealing with construction permits . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 642Table 5 The ease of registering property in Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey,

as well as the corresponding regional averages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 642Table 6 The ease of getting credit indicators in Iran, Pakistan and

Turkey, and the corresponding regional averages in MENA,SA, EECA, and OECD . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643

Table 7 The ease of paying taxes in Iran, Pakistan, and Turkey, and thecorresponding regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 643

Table 8 National expert survey in Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and the meanin different levels of economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 644

Table 9 The overall and detailed rankings of gender gap in Iran,Pakistan, and Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647

Chapter 25

Table 1 Entrepreneurial perceptions for women and men in Iran,Pakistan, and Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 652

Table 2 Key activity and profile indicators for women and men in Iran,Pakistan, and Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 652

Chapter 26

Table 1 Correlations table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 666Table 2 Factors determining the entrepreneurial activity in ECO region . . . 667Table 3 Factors determining the entrepreneurial activity in Turkey

Pakistan and Iran . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 668Table 4 Factors determining the female total early stage entrepreneurial

activity in economic cooperation organization (ECO) region . . . . . 673Table 5 Factors determining the female total early stage entrepreneurial

activity in Turkey, Pakistan and Iran separately . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 674

List of Tables xxxiii

Chapter 27

Table 1 Economic freedom scores of Iran, Pakistan and Turkeycompared to their regional scores as well as regional andworld rankings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 680

Table 2 A comparison of open market components’ scores among Iran,Pakistan, and Turkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 682

Table 3 Average level of free trade and female internationalization indifferent phases of economic development . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 686

Table 4 Export intensity of early-stage entrepreneurial activity . . . . . . . . . . . . 687Table 5 Export intensity of established business owners . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 687

xxxiv List of Tables

List of Graphs

Chapter 15

Graph 1 Probability of being a tea entrepreneur among women withrespect to age and regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 444

Graph 2 Probability of being a tea entrepreneur among men withrespect to age and regions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 445

xxxv