Christopher John Boudreaux

Recent studies have argued that governments should play a more active role in driving innovation by undertaking high-risk, mission-oriented investments. In this framework, governments should shape markets instead of fixing them. The mission-oriented economy highlights state-led technological breakthroughs, yet it overlooks the informational role of market discipline. Insulated from profit-and-loss feedback, government-led missions will supplant entrepreneurial successes with engineering ones. This raises broader concerns about equating risk-taking with entrepreneurship and replacing decentralized discovery with centralized direction. This article examines these tensions and outlines a framework for understanding how markets and states contribute differently to innovation.

Human capital is a critical resource for new ventures; the distinct differences between general and specific human capital in the context of founder gender remain underexplored. Drawing on human capital theory, we investigate how general human capital (GHC) and specific human capital (SHC) influence new venture performance and whether these effects are moderated by founder gender. Informed by feminist perspectives, which highlight gendered barriers, we explore how the benefits of human capital might differ for male and female entrepreneurs. Analysis of longitudinal data from the Growing America Through Entrepreneurship (GATE) study reveals that GHC has a stronger positive association with venture continuation and growth, with this effect amplified for male founders compared to female founders. This disparity underscores the need for a deeper understanding of how gender intersects with human capital in shaping entrepreneurial outcomes. The study contributes to human capital theory and gendered perspectives on entrepreneurship by suggesting the need for tailored support programs that address gender-specific barriers to the utilization of human capital.

Using data from 90 countries from the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor and the World Bank, we examine the country-level determinants of entrepreneurs’ sensing, seizing, and transforming capabilities, three clusters of dynamic capabilities. Our findings reveal that both the quality of entrepreneurship education and an autonomous culture promote entrepreneurs’ capabilities. However, these relationships differ depending on the country type (innovation-driven, efficiency-driven, and factors-driven countries). An autonomous culture positively influences entrepreneurs’ sensing and seizing capabilities, but not transforming capabilities. Additionally, institutional support for entrepreneurship education enhances dynamic capabilities, especially in developing countries. The research uncovers institutional mechanisms that explain cross-country variations in entrepreneurs’ dynamic capabilities, providing a deeper understanding of the interplay between culture, institutions, and dynamic capabilities.

We examine how disaster events influence small business activity in a sample of 48 U.S. states for the period from 1998 to 2018. Our results show that disaster impacts vary by entrepreneurship type; the rate of new entrepreneurs and start‐up job creation rise in the aftermath of natural disasters, whereas the opportunity share of new entrepreneurs and start‐up survival fall. These findings present a more nuanced understanding of the relationship between natural disasters and entrepreneurial activity than reported in the relevant literature. We interpret our findings in the context of economic dynamism and discuss policy implications.