Global Entrepreneurship Monitor versus Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics: comparing their intellectual structures

Antonio Rafael Ramos-Rodriguez,Salustiano Martinez-Fierro,Jose Aurelio Medina-Garrido,Jose Ruiz-Navarro
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/S11365-013-0292-1
2023-12-18
Abstract:In the past 15 years, two international observatories have been intensively studying entrepreneurship using empirical studies with different methodologies: GEM and PSED. Both projects have generated a considerable volume of scientific production, and their intellectual structures are worth analyzing. The current work is an exploratory study of the knowledge base of the articles generated by each of these two observatories and published in prestigious journals. The value added of this work lies in its novel characterization of the intellectual structure of entrepreneurship according to the academic production of these two initiatives. The results may be of interest to the managers and members of these observatories, as well as to academics, researchers, sponsors and policymakers interested in entrepreneurship.
General Economics
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
This paper mainly compares the differences in knowledge structure between two international entrepreneurship research projects, the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor (GEM) and the Panel Study of Entrepreneurial Dynamics (PSED). The author explores the knowledge foundation of the academic achievements generated by these two projects through literature analysis and citation analysis, and provides a new characterization of their structures. GEM is a project initiated by Babson College in the United States and London Business School in the United Kingdom in 1999, aiming to study individuals' attitudes towards entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial activities worldwide. Its goal is to fill the information gap regarding entrepreneurial activities at the international level and promote related research. The GEM project focuses on the relationship between entrepreneurship and national economic growth. By collecting a large amount of data, it compares entrepreneurial activities in different countries, identifies factors influencing the level of entrepreneurial activities, and provides a basis for policy makers. The PSED project originated from a study of adult residents in Wisconsin in 1993 and was later expanded nationwide. The project focuses on detailed data on the early development of new ventures to understand the dynamics of the entrepreneurial process. PSED's uniqueness lies in its tracking of individual entrepreneurs and obtaining information on the entrepreneurial process, teams, networks, and environmental conditions. By comparing the precedents, objectives, theoretical models, methodologies, and main results of GEM and PSED, the paper explores their respective knowledge structures and uses citation and co-citation analysis to identify the most frequently cited literature and their relationships. The author points out that this type of research is valuable for understanding the academic production of these two important international observatories and for scholars, researchers, sponsors, and policy makers interested in entrepreneurship. In summary, the paper attempts to address the question of how to understand and analyze the knowledge structure of the entrepreneurship research field by comparing the GEM and PSED projects, and evaluate the impact of these two projects on promoting the development of the field.