Global Entrepreneurship Monitor

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor
Name	Global Entrepreneurship Monitor
Type	Research consortium
Founded	1999
Founders	Achtenhagen; Szerb, László; Reynolds, Paul D.; GEM Consortium
Headquarters	Babson College; London Business School
Region served	Worldwide
Focus	Entrepreneurship research

Global Entrepreneurship Monitor The Global Entrepreneurship Monitor is an international research consortium that measures entrepreneurial activity across countries and over time. It produces comparative reports used by policymakers, academics, and institutions to assess nascent entrepreneurship, firm creation, and entrepreneurial attitudes. The project links longitudinal survey data with national data to inform decision-making at Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, United Nations Development Programme, World Bank, International Monetary Fund, and regional organizations.

Overview

The project assembles a network of academic teams from institutions such as Babson College, London Business School, Universidad del Desarrollo, Istanbul University, University of Cape Town, Fudan University, University of São Paulo, National University of Singapore, McGill University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Harvard University, University of Oxford, Columbia University, Stanford University, University of Melbourne, University of Toronto, University of California, Berkeley, Tel Aviv University, Seoul National University, University of Amsterdam, Copenhagen Business School, HEC Paris, SDA Bocconi School of Management, IE Business School, University of Zurich, University of Geneva, University of Tokyo, Keio University, Australian National University, University of Auckland, Trinity College Dublin, King's College London, University of Lagos, Pontifical Catholic University of Chile, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, University of Nairobi, University of Ghana, Peking University, Tsinghua University, Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Indian Institute of Management Ahmedabad, Indian Institute of Technology Bombay, University of São Paulo School of Economics, University of Buenos Aires, University of Colombo, Cairo University, Ain Shams University, University of Tehran, University of Warsaw, Charles University, University of Helsinki, University of Oslo, Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich, Technical University of Munich, University of Munich, Humboldt University of Berlin, Free University of Berlin, University of Barcelona, Autonoma University of Madrid, Complutense University of Madrid, University of Bologna, Sapienza University of Rome, University of Milan, University of Lisbon, Catholic University of Portugal, Hanken School of Economics, Dublin City University, National Taiwan University, Chulalongkorn University, Mahidol University, King Saud University, University of Jordan, Ain Shams University Hospital.

History and development

The initiative began in 1999 with collaboration among scholars like Paul D. Reynolds and partners at Babson College and London Business School, later expanding through alliances with research centres at OECD-linked institutions and national statistical agencies. Early cycles compared high-income countries represented by teams from United States and United Kingdom with emerging markets including Brazil, India, China, South Africa, Mexico, Argentina, Chile, Colombia, Poland, Czech Republic, Hungary, Turkey, Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, Morocco, Nigeria, Kenya and Ghana. Subsequent phases incorporated thematic reports influenced by research at World Economic Forum, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, European Commission, African Development Bank, Asian Development Bank, Inter-American Development Bank, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, Ford Foundation and private partners. Major publications were presented at venues such as World Economic Forum Annual Meeting, UN General Assembly, G20 Summit, OECD Forum and academic conferences including Academy of Management Annual Meeting and Babson College Entrepreneurship Research Conference.

Methodology

GEM uses standardized adult population surveys carried out by national teams affiliated with institutions like Statistical Institute of Jamaica, INEGI, Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística, Office for National Statistics (United Kingdom), U.S. Census Bureau, Statistics Canada, Australian Bureau of Statistics, Statistics South Africa and academic survey providers. The methodology integrates the Adult Population Survey and the National Expert Survey, drawing on frameworks from World Bank Doing Business Report and indicators used by United Nations Development Programme Human Development Report. Sampling protocols reference standards applied by Demographic and Health Surveys Program and guidelines from International Monetary Fund and World Bank Group statistical manuals. Analytical techniques leverage econometric methods typical of researchers at Harvard Business School, Stanford Graduate School of Business, MIT Sloan School of Management and London School of Economics, and incorporate entrepreneurship definitions influenced by Joseph Schumpeter and later scholars affiliated with University of Wuppertal and Max Planck Institute for Innovation and Competition.

Key findings and trends

GEM reports highlight cross-national variation in Total early-stage Entrepreneurial Activity (TEA), showing differing patterns among clusters such as Nordic countries (including Sweden, Denmark, Norway, Finland), Anglosphere nations (United States, Canada, Australia, New Zealand), East Asia (including Japan, South Korea, China, Taiwan), Southeast Asia (including Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam), Latin America (including Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Colombia), and Sub-Saharan Africa (including Nigeria, Kenya, South Africa, Ghana). Trends reported include variations in necessity-driven versus opportunity-driven entrepreneurship, gender gaps studied alongside research from UN Women and World Bank Gender Data, youth entrepreneurship trends comparable to findings at UNICEF, and the role of innovation intensity noted by scholars at European Innovation Council and institutions like Fraunhofer Society and Max Planck Society. Longitudinal analyses connect entrepreneurship rates to indicators tracked by OECD Indicators, World Bank World Development Indicators, Human Development Index, Global Competitiveness Report, and patenting activity registered at World Intellectual Property Organization.

Impact and uses

Policymakers at European Commission, United Nations, African Union, ASEAN Secretariat, Mercosur Secretariat and finance ministries have used GEM findings to design interventions, tax incentives, and entrepreneurship education programs developed with universities such as Harvard University, MIT, Stanford University, IESE Business School, ESADE Business School and think tanks like Brookings Institution, RAND Corporation, Center for Strategic and International Studies, Chatham House and Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. Development agencies including USAID, DFID, Canadian International Development Agency, JICA, KfW and GIZ reference GEM for diagnostics. Private sector stakeholders such as Goldman Sachs, McKinsey & Company, Boston Consulting Group, Accenture, PwC, KPMG, Deloitte and venture ecosystems around Silicon Valley, Shenzhen, Tel Aviv', Bengaluru, Berlin Startup Scene use GEM data in reports and benchmarking.

Criticism and limitations

Scholars at University of Oxford, London School of Economics, University of Chicago, Princeton University, Yale University, University of Pennsylvania, Columbia University, University of Michigan, University of California, Los Angeles, University of Warwick, University of Sussex, University College London and policy analysts at International Labour Organization and OECD have critiqued GEM for potential sampling bias, comparability challenges across national teams, and reliance on self-reported measures. Methodological debates reference work by Angus Deaton, Amartya Sen, Duncan Watts and others on survey design, and critiques often compare GEM outputs with alternative datasets such as World Bank Enterprise Surveys, Eurostat Community Innovation Survey, International Labour Organization LABORSTA, UNIDO Industrial Statistics, and administrative records from national patent offices like United States Patent and Trademark Office, European Patent Office, China National Intellectual Property Administration and Japan Patent Office. Limitations include difficulties capturing informal sector activity prominent in countries such as India, Nigeria, Indonesia, Ethiopia and Democratic Republic of the Congo, and debates about measuring entrepreneurial quality versus quantity raised in literature from National Bureau of Economic Research and IZA Institute of Labor Economics.

Category:Research projects