Entrepreneurial activity and regional development

Figures & data

Table 1. Pearson’s coefficients for the linear correlation between the entrepreneurial activity (EA) or the change of entrepreneurial activity (%diffEA) and the GDP pc or the %diffGDP pc of Croatian counties in the period from 2006 to 2012.

	GDP pc 2006	GDP pc 2007	GDP pc 2008	GDP pc 2009	GDP pc 2010	GDP pc 2011	%diffGDP pc 2007 − 2006	%diffGDP pc 2008 − 2007	%diffGDP pc 2009 − 2008	%diffGDP pc 2010 − 2009	%diffGDP pc 2011 − 2010	%diffGDP pc 2011 − 2006
EA_2006	0.8421	0.8964	0.8711	0.8910	0.8947	0.8945	0.0000	−0.2241	0.6403	0.2935	−0.4289	0.1545
EA_2007	0.8317	0.8880	0.8633	0.8831	0.8885	0.8867	0.0098	−0.2187	0.6377	0.3029	−0.4425	0.1667
EA_2008	0.8264	0.8856	0.8600	0.8786	0.8874	0.8843	0.0267	−0.2238	0.6267	0.3216	−0.4557	0.1832
EA_2009	0.8207	0.8812	0.8528	0.8720	0.8816	0.8769	0.0317	−0.2397	0.6279	0.3236	−0.4655	0.1746
EA_2010	0.8257	0.8860	0.8598	0.8777	0.8876	0.8842	0.0354	−0.2276	0.6210	0.3254	−0.4568	0.1891
EA_2011	0.8078	0.8724	0.8435	0.8637	0.8742	0.8705	0.0602	−0.2401	0.6308	0.3218	−0.4496	0.2091
EA_2012	0.8125	0.8775	0.8480	0.8680	0.8781	0.8733	0.0600	−0.2436	0.6329	0.3224	−0.4609	0.2022
%diff EA_2007_2006	0.2917	0.3500	0.3738	0.3733	0.4095	0.3723	0.1787	−0.0985	0.2778	0.3676	−0.5788	0.3550
%diff EA_2008_2007	0.0407	0.0836	0.0794	0.0446	0.1124	0.0869	0.2016	−0.0334	−0.2109	0.4270	−0.3386	0.2572
%diff EA_2009_2008	−0.3876	−0.4125	−0.4481	−0.4455	−0.4256	−0.4423	0.0114	−0.1975	−0.2650	−0.0801	0.1137	−0.2403
%diff EA_2010_2009	−0.0557	−0.0621	−0.0137	−0.0387	−0.0390	−0.0181	0.0295	0.3277	−0.2110	−0.0292	0.2223	0.2421
%diff EA_2011_2010	−0.4542	−0.4144	−0.4498	−0.4061	−0.4131	−0.3899	0.3315	−0.1144	0.0573	−0.2501	0.5040	0.3169
%diff EA_2012_2011	0.2857	0.3054	0.2954	0.2964	0.2743	0.2344	0.0053	−0.1239	0.2483	0.0664	−0.5378	−0.1987

Source: Author’s research and calculation.

Table 2. Pearson’s coefficients for the linear correlation between the entrepreneurial activity (EA) or the change of entrepreneurial activity (%diffEA) and the registered unemployment rate (u.r.) or the change of registered unemployment rate (%diffu.r.) in Croatian counties for the period from 2006 to 2012.

	u.r. 2006	u.r. 2007	u.r. 2008	u.r. 2009	u.r. 2010	u.r. 2011	u.r. 2012	%Δdiffu.r. 2007 – 2006	%diffu.r. 2008 – 2007	%diffu.r. 2009 – 2008	%diffu.r. 2010 – 2009	%diffu.r. 2011 – 2010	%diffu.r. 2012 – 2011	%diffu.r. 2007 – 2011
EA_2006	−0.7805	−0.7720	−0.7566	−0.7787	−0.7975	−0.7959	−0.7993	−0.0398	−0.4864	0.3777	0.3806	0.1367	−0.1038	0.2639
EA_2007	−0.7838	−0.7754	−0.7608	−0.7840	−0.8043	−0.8036	−0.8077	−0.0405	−0.4909	0.3779	0.3691	0.1245	−0.1150	0.2543
EA_2008	−0.7753	−0.7667	−0.7543	−0.7795	−0.8023	−0.8034	−0.8077	−0.0369	−0.4964	0.3609	0.3502	0.1058	−0.1192	0.2300
EA_2009	−0.7788	−0.7698	−0.7565	−0.7806	−0.8034	−0.8029	−0.8076	−0.0307	−0.4893	0.3712	0.3460	0.1191	−0.1251	0.2389
EA_2010	−0.7704	−0.7625	−0.7511	−0.7771	−0.7999	−0.8005	−0.8063	−0.0410	−0.4996	0.3555	0.3478	0.1111	−0.1344	0.2261
EA_2011	−0.7627	−0.7545	−0.7435	−0.7699	−0.7920	−0.7913	−0.7964	−0.0336	−0.4949	0.3471	0.3428	0.1196	−0.1261	0.2227
EA_2012	−0.7684	−0.7595	−0.7486	−0.7750	−0.7978	−0.7975	−0.8029	−0.0274	−0.4979	0.3500	0.3409	0.1187	−0.1324	0.2222
%diffEA_2007_2006	−0.4894	−0.4924	−0.5163	−0.5595	−0.5996	−0.6245	−0.6504	−0.1247	−0.5020	0.0867	0.0355	−0.2093	−0.3304	−0.1431
%diffEA_2008_2007	0.0958	0.1007	0.0558	0.0128	−0.0389	−0.0896	−0.0852	0.0592	−0.1966	−0.3052	−0.3176	−0.4694	−0.0391	−0.4874
%diffEA_2009_2008	0.2740	0.2813	0.3139	0.3517	0.3644	0.4118	0.4102	0.1956	0.4730	0.0142	−0.1789	0.3723	−0.0033	0.1585
%diffEA_2010_2009	0.2937	0.2648	0.2224	0.1831	0.1860	0.1542	0.1293	−0.2495	−0.1285	−0.3272	−0.0672	−0.3129	−0.2312	−0.3228
%diffEA_2011_2010	0.3521	0.3568	0.3691	0.3734	0.3983	0.4270	0.4424	0.1474	0.3481	−0.1781	−0.1156	0.2109	0.2038	0.0072
%diffEA_2012_2011	−0.4073	−0.3745	−0.3829	−0.3926	−0.4239	−0.4416	−0.4482	0.2518	−0.2856	0.1269	0.0216	−0.0697	−0.1445	−0.0271

Source: Author’s research and calculation.

Table 3. Results of panel analyses of how development level indicators influence counties’ growth of entrepreneurial activity.

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)
	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt
%diff_EAt-1	−0.378***(−3.65)	−0.284**(−3.12)	−0.286**(−3.15)	−0.390***(−4.76)	−0.420***(−5.00)	−0.396***(−4.82)	−0.396***(−4.86)
GDPpct-1	0.000306(1.02)				−0.00116***(−4.34)	−0.000977***(−3.88)	−0.000817***(−1.91)
u.r.t-1		−2.010***(−7.10)	−1.954***(−4.16)	0.454(−1.01)	−2.874***(−8.99)	−2.982***(−6.12)	−2.250*(−2.47)
u.r.*DI			−0.000681(−0.11)			0.00441(0.80)
u.r.* GDPpct-1				−0.0000379***(−4.15)			−0.00000691(0.49)
cons	−11.81(−0.61)	44.59***(8.65)	44.35***(8.60)	57.52***(10.42)	135.5***(6.31)	120.8***(5.97)	109.5***(3.62)
N	63	63	63	63	63	63	63

Note: t statistics in parentheses.

^* p<0.05

^** p<0.01

^*** p < 0.001.

Source: Author’s research and calculation.

Table 4. Results of panel analyses of how economic growth indicators influence counties’ growth of entrepreneurial activity.

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)	(7)	(8)	(9)
	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EAt	%diff_EA_t	%diff_EA_t
%diff_EAt-1	−0.728^***(−6.66)	−0.690^***(−7.17)	−0.691^***(−6.84)	−0.384^**(−3.04)	−0.430^***(−3.40)	−0.415^***(−3.33)	−0.511^**(−3.11)	−0.456^***(−3.48)	−0.483^***(−3.73)
%diff_GDPpct-1	−0.351^***(−3.60)	−0.291^*(−2.34)	−0.715^*(−2.34)				−0.763^***(−3.88)	−0.758^***(−3.53)	−1.370^**(−2.87)
%diff_GDPpct-1^*DI		−0.00000402(−0.00)						0.00323(1.02)
%diff_GDPpct-1^*GDPpct-1			0.00000709(1.33)						0.0000140(1.68)
%diff_u.r.t-1				−0.0300(−0.50)	−0.0168(−0.14)	0.0323(0.22)	−0.365^**(−3.07)	−0.657^***(−3.36)	−0.715^**(−3.07)
%diff_u.r.t-1^*DI					0.0000619(0.07)			0.00428^**(2.66)
%diff_u.r.t-1^*GDPpct-1						−0.000000763(−0.42)			0.00000683^*(2.43)
cons	10.26^***(11.91)	9.962^***(12.67)	9.731^***(11.41)	7.940^***(10.31)	8.121^***(10.66)	8.054^***(10.69)	11.12^***(8.82)	10.09^***(10.69)	9.892^***(9.44)
N	63	63	63	63	63	63	63	63	63

Note: t statistics in parentheses.

^* p<0.05

^** p<0.01

^*** p < 0.001

Source: Author’s research and calculation.

Table 5. Results of panel analyses of how growth of entrepreneurial activity influence counties’ economic growth.

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
	%diff_GDPpct	%diff_GDPpct	%diff_GDPpct	%diff_u.r.t	%diff_u.r.t	%diff_u.r.t
%diff_GDPpct-1	−0.156(−0.98)	−0.0634(−0.35)	0.0405(0.24)
EAt-1	22.44^*(2.06)	76.19^**(2.61)	62.90^***(3.37)	−92.50^***(−6.25)	−159.7^***(−5.98)	−156.0^***(−6.70)
EAt-1 ^* DI		−0.440^*(−2.14)			0.445^**(3.04)
EAt-1 ^* GDPpct-1			−0.000536^**(−2.71)			0.000589^***(3.54)
%diff_u.r.t-1				0.422^***(3.48)	0.573^***(4.36)	0.671^***(4.72)
cons	−11.81(−0.61)	−53.25^**(−2.61)	−39.31^*(−2.48)	158.0^***(6.74)	193.5^***(7.37)	189.2^***(7.44)
N	42	42	42	42	42	42

Note: t statistics in parentheses.

^* p<0.05

^** p<0.01

^*** p < 0.001

Source: Author’s research and calculation.

Table 6. Results of panel analyses of how growth of entrepreneurial activity influences counties’ economic growth indicators

	(1)	(2)	(3)	(4)	(5)	(6)
	%diff_GDPpct	%diff_GDPpct	%diff_GDPpct	%diff_u.r.t	%diff_u.r.t	%diff_u.r.t
%diff_GDPpct-1	−0.793^***(−4.06)	−0.792^***(−4.01)	−0.782^***(−3.96)
%diff_EAt-1	−0.818^**(−2.88)	−1.121^**(−2.88)	−1.166(−1.69)	1.510^***(3.57)	0.680(1.65)	−0.0952(−0.12)
%diff_EAt-1 ^* DI		0.00522(1.13)			0.0167^*(2.40)
%diff_EAt-1 ^* GDPpct-1			0.00000655(0.59)			0.0000284^*(1.98)
%diff_u.r.t-1				−0.710^***(−4.34)	−0.865^***(−5.32)	−0.774^***(−5.24)
cons	3.420(1.76)	3.022(1.51)	3.160(1.60)	5.223^*(2.26)	3.998(1.91)	5.020^*(2.57)
N	42	42	42	42	42	42

Note: t statistics in parentheses.

^* p<0.05

^** p<0.01

^*** p < 0.001

Source: Author’s research and calculation.