The Crucial Role of Entrepreneurship To Economic Prosperity

The US Economic Report of the President acknowledges the crucial role played by entrepreneurship in wealth generation...

America’s small businesses are an essential building block to economic growth and prosperity, in part because entrepreneurs create a disproportionate share of net new jobs in the U.S. economy.

The report includes the following data. (bold highlights mine)

One particularly important contribution of small firms to the Nation’s well-being is the jobs they create. According to the SBA’s Office of Advocacy, small firms accounted for 9.8 million of the 15 million net new private sector jobs created between 1993 and 2009—nearly two out of every three of the period’s net new jobs. In normal times, new small businesses account disproportionately for employment growth. Although many new firms fail, surviving Supporting America’s Small Businesses | 145 firms create enough jobs to offset those lost to firm exits, so that most jobs created by firm births persist. A recent Kauffman Foundation study, for example, shows that startup firms created 3.1 million gross jobs in the United States in 2000. By 2005, about half of the initial firms had failed, but the survivors still employed 2.4 million people (Kane 2010).

(source Tim Kane, Growthology.org Kauffman The Foundation of Entrepreurship)

I am reminded of the great Ludwig von Mises who wrote,

In the capitalist system of society's economic organization the entrepreneurs determine the course of production. In the performance of this function they are unconditionally and totally subject to the sovereignty of the buying public, the consumers. If they fail to produce in the cheapest and best possible way those commodities which the consumers are asking for most urgently, they suffer losses and are finally eliminated from their entrepreneurial position. Other men who know better how to serve the consumers replace them.

Entrepreneurs, aside from the capitalists, are the heroes of the modern capitalist (market) economy.

How Free Markets In The Telecom Industry Aids Economic Development

The global telecom industry best exemplifies how competition spurs economic development.

The growth in mobile use has been phenomenal; some 5 billion people are expected to be subscribers by the end of 2010- that's about 75% of the world population!

And mobile broadband (internet) takeup is also expected to exceed a billion users from 600 million as of 2009!

What makes this astounding is that the gist of the growth has been in the developing or poor economies. In short the poor is benefiting from free trade!

The following charts are from the World Bank's Development Indicators....
And that's because competition has prompted for a sharp decline of prices or fees for mobile services.

In short, the wonders of competition and technology based DEFLATION! (Darn the mainstream for painting deflation as evil)


And lower prices has attracted widespread demand which has led to this astounding growth!


These are emblematic of basic economic laws at work.

Competition drives prices lower, lower prices prompts for more demand, and finally widespread use indicates enhancement to people's lifestyle via enhanced connectivity, greater access to information, the lowering of transaction costs, more efficient markets, greater market breadth, influences on how politics are being shaped, introduces new services and importantly, more prosperity.

So in contrast to protectionists, who are so naively averse to competition and blame everything else to globalization, when domestic policies (bubble policies, regulatory quirks and bias, protectionism, cronyism and statism) have been the culprit for their woes, competition is and will be a MAJOR plus.

Proof?

This magnificent article from Jenny C. Aker and Isaac M. Mbiti of the Boston Review (hat tip: Mark Perry)

[bold emphasis mine]

``There are some good reasons to believe that mobile phones could be the gateway to better lives and livelihoods for poor people. While some of the most fundamental ideas in economics about the virtues of markets assume that information is costless and equally available to all, low-income countries in sub-Saharan Africa are very far from that idealization. Prior to the introduction of mobile phones, farmers, traders, and consumers had to travel long distances to markets, often over very poor roads, simply to obtain price (and other) information. Such travel imposed significant costs in time and money.

``Mobile phones, by contrast, reduce the cost of information. When mobile phones were introduced in Niger, search costs fell by half. Farmers, consumers, and firms can now obtain more and in many cases “better” information—in other words, information that meets their needs. People can then use this information to take advantage of arbitrage opportunities by selling in different markets at different times of year, migrating to new areas, or offering new products. This should, in theory, lead to more efficient markets and improve welfare.

``An emerging body of research suggests that perhaps theory is meeting reality. In many cases, these economic gains from information have occurred without donor investments or interventions from non-governmental organizations. Rather, they are the result of a positive externality from the information technology (IT) sector.

``In Niger, millet, a household staple, is sold via traditional markets scattered throughout the country. Some markets are more than a thousand kilometers away from others with which they trade. The rollout of mobile phone coverage reduced grain price differences across markets by 15 percent between 2001 and 2007, with a greater impact on markets isolated by distance and poor-quality roads. Mobile phones allowed traders to better respond to surpluses and shortages, thereby allocating grains more efficiently across markets and dampening price differences. Mobile phone coverage also increased traders’ profits and decreased the volatility of prices over the course of the year.

``The benefits of mobile phones are not limited to grain markets or to Africa. Robert Jensen, a UCLA economist, found that in the Indian coastal state of Kerala, mobile phones reduced price differences across fish markets by almost 60 percent between 1997 and 2001, providing an almost-perfect example of the “Law of One Price”: when markets work efficiently, identical goods have the same price. Even more impressive, mobile phones almost completely eliminated fisherman’s waste—the catch left unsold at the end of the day—by allowing fishermen to call around to different markets while at sea, choose the market with the best price, and sell accordingly. Mobile phones resulted in welfare improvements for both fishermen and consumers: fishermen’s profits increased by 8 percent, and consumer prices declined by 4 percent."

The article further deals with how the free market in telecoms has influenced improvements to education, health services, financial transaction (mobile banking) and governance (vigil on corruption).

Read the rest here.

Applied to the Philippines, mobile subscribers are estimated today at 72.8 million, according to the Streetinsider.com, or about 80% of the entire population!

Yet popular mobile usage is helping facilitate the introduction of new services as financial intermediation or mobile banking.


Where a big segment remains unbanked, mobile banking is helping to close this gap.

Writes the McKinsey Quarterly,

[bold emphasis mine]

``In the Philippines, for example, mobile-subscriber penetration is almost 80 percent, but banking penetration is only around 35 percent, leaving 21 million mobile subscribers with no bank account. If operators in the Philippines could bring mobile-money penetration rates among the unbanked into line with those achieved by best-practice operators elsewhere, they could acquire four million to five million new customers and add two to three percentage points of growth to their revenues. And these numbers don’t include earnings on loans and deposits, which we conservatively estimate could be a further $60 million to $80 million. Introductory mobile-money services also set the stage for additional cross-selling and up-selling in the future. In addition, eight million unbanked people in the Philippines don’t have mobile phones, and mobile money could make phone subscriptions more attractive to this segment."

From the development aspect, it is worthwhile to repeat that competition impacts the world in general positively.

In terms of investment, in the Philippines, industries that revolve around the growth of mobile banking should be a worthwhile field to consider.

The Final word from Friedrich August von Hayek,

``Competition is essentially a process of the formation of opinion: by spreading information, it creates that unity and coherence of the economic system which we presuppose when we think of it as one market. It creates the views people have about what is best and cheapest, and it is because of it that people know at least as much about possibilities and opportunities as they in fact do. It is thus a process which involves a continuous change in the data and whose significance must therefore be completely missed by any theory which treats these data as constant."

Yes, the telecom industry is essentially validating Hayek.

Daniel Mitchell: The Case Against Big Government

From Daniel Mitchell of Cato.org