Abstract

The aim of the article. The paper presents the research results that specify current institutional determinants in rural entrepreneurship development. The establishment of rural entrepreneurship is a key factor in rural economy revival, as well as, Ukrainian identity in particular. To reduce the impact of institutional barriers in business development, mandatory would be to consider the existing legal, economic, political, social canons, requirements and regulations. On the one hand, the components hereof will increase business efficiency, and on the other hand they will contribute to opportunistic behavior of economic agents when signing contracts or executing them. Therefore, coordination of external (formal) institutions and internal (informal) institutional elements will improve the conditions for entrepreneurship development and rise business economic efficiency in particular. The article is aimed at determining institutional impact on the development of rural entrepreneurship and justification of areas in order to overcome barriers of institutional character to form strategic goals of strengthening economic business performance. The results of the analysis. The paper highlights basic premise for creating institutional framework of rural entrepreneurship. It is proposed to consider institutional entrepreneurship environment in rural areas as a specific infrastructure designed to facilitate efficient operations, rapid product turnover, company positive image formation and innovation implementation in economic activity. The main problems of institutional environment in assessing rural entrepreneurship are associated with a limited amount of statistic information. The existing methods do not allow determining of entrepreneurship institutional determinants in rural areas or on that basis to justify innovative directions for each structure further operation. Therefore, the author proposes to use a method of constructing multicorrelation-regression model and poll results. Analyzing the parameters of correlation-regression model it was determined that business economic situation 80,3% depends on these institutional determinants and 19,7% on other undetermined factors. When planning and implementing innovative technologies, rural entrepreneurs must also take into account the effect of such factors as legal government innovation, the amount of transaction costs, «the rules of the game» in the market, as well as, the formation of company financial and credit supply. The author found the major reserves for business improvement that mark the reduction of negative impact of government institutions. Conclusions and directions of further researches. Thus, the implementation of highlighted methodological approaches to estimating the impact of institutional determinants of rural entrepreneurship development allowed conducting a comprehensive analysis of the major problems in operation. The research results prove that the most favorable determinants of economic impact on state businesses should be considered the transaction cost reduction, proper legislation and support of rural entrepreneurs from the state. The prospects for future research should be oriented towards finding a reasonable institutional mechanism that will improve the efficiency of business activities in rural areas. The development of the innovation management methods of rural entrepreneurship structures will balance the effect of institutional «traps».  

Keywords: institute, institutional determinants institution, correlation and regression analysis, model development, rural entrepreneurship

JEL Classification: M20, Q12, Q13.

Cite as: Usyuk, T. (2013). Institutional determiners of rural entrepreneurship development. Marketing and Management of Innovations, 4, 283-290. https://doi.org/10.21272/mmi.2013.4-27

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

References

1. Manylich, M.I. (2009). Metodyka otsinky mezoinstytutsiinoho seredovyshcha v konteksti yevrointehratsii [Methods of assessing mezoinstytional environment in the context of European integration]. Retrived from http://www.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/soc_gum/znpen/2009_5/2. Metodyka%20otsinky%20mezoinstytutionalnogo%20seredovyshcha.pdf [in Ukrainian].
2. Marmoza, A.T. (2004). Metodychni rekomendatsii shchodo zastosuvannia koreliatsiino-rehresiinoho analizu v kursovomu ta dyplomnomu proektuvanni ta naukovykh doslidzhenniakh [Methodical recommendations for the the use of correlation and regressive analysis course and diploma design and research]. Zhytomyr: State Agroecological University [in Ukrainian].
3. Kovalenko, Yu.M. (2009). Mozhlyvosti i mezhi instytutsionalizmu yak doslidnytskoi prohramy [Possibilities and limits of institutionalism as a research program]. Zb. nauk. pr. Nats. un-tu derzh. podatkovoi sluzhby Ukrainy – Scientific Papers of the State Tax Service of Ukraine [in Ukrainian].
4. Matviichuk, O.V. (2011). Instytutsionalni chynnyky yak pershoosnova staloho rozvytku natsionalnoi ekonomiky Ukrainy [Institutional factors as a fundamental principle of sustainable development of the national economy of Ukraine]. Retrived from http://archive.nbuv.gov.ua/ portal/soc_gum/Tmm/2011_36/12.pdf [in Ukrainian].
5. Zbarskyi, V.K. (2009). Teoretychni aspekty pidpryiemnytstva [The theoretical aspects of business]. Visnyk SNAU. Seriia «Finansy i kredyt» – Bulletin of Sumy National Agrarian University. Series «Finance and Credit» [in Ukrainian].
6. Kostrytsia, M.M. (2011). Rozvytok pidpryiemnytstva yak instytutsiinyi chynnyk pidvyshchennia natsionalnoi konkurentospromozhnosti [Development of institutional entrepreneurship as a factor of increasing of national competitiveness]. Visnyk ZhDTU – Bulletin Zhytomyr State Technological University [in Ukrainian].
7. Malik, M.Y., Shpykuliak, O.H. (2006). Rozvytok  pidpryiemnytstva v ahrarnomu sektori ekonomiky [Entrepreneurship development in the agricultural sector]. Ekonomika APK – Economics of APK [in Ukrainian].
8. Kovalova, O.V. (2012). Instytutsiini formy orhanizatsii upravlinnia rozvytkom ahrarnoho sektora [The institutional forms of management development of the agricultural sector]. Retrived from http://archive.nbuv.gov.ua/portal/chem_biol/vpdaa/2012_4/121.pdf [in Ukrainian].
9. Furubotn, E.G. (2005). Institutions and Economic Theory: The Contribution of the New Institutional Economics (Economics, Cognition, and Society). МІ: University of Michigan Press [in English].
10. Ostrom, E. (1990). Governing the Commons: The Evolution of Institutions for Collective  Action. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press [in English].
11. Worldwide Governance Indicators. Retrived from: http://info.worldbank.org/governance/ wgi/sc_country.asp [in English].