Description
Entrepreneurship in the Wake of the Crisis Entrepreneurship Database 2012
viewpoint
PUBLIC POLICY FOR THE PRIVATE SECTOR
T
H
E
W
O
R
L
D
B
A
N
K
G
R
O
U
P
F
I
N
A
N
C
I
A
L
A
N
D
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
S
E
C
T
O
R
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
V
I
C
E
P
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
Y
New data f rom the 2012 Worl d Bank Entrepreneurshi p Database show
that the pace of new f i rm creati on i n most economi es has begun to
recover af ter the sharp drops experi enced duri ng the 2008–09
f i nanci al cri si s. The database provi des a uni que i ndi cator of new
busi ness regi strati on around the worl d that can be used to study
trends wi thi n economi es and regi ons, the ef f ect of ref orms, and the
f actors that f oster dynami c pri vate sector growth.
Entrepreneurial activity is a pillar of economic
growth. In the wake of the 2008–09 financial
crisis, policy makers, private sector leaders, and
researchers are renewing their focus on job
growth and new firm creation. Often missing
from their efforts, however, are internation-
ally comparable, time-series data on formal
entrepreneurship. The newly updated World
Bank Entrepreneurship Database is a critical
source of data supporting the measurement
of entrepreneurial activity across economies
and over time. The data allow a deeper under-
standing of the relationship between new firm
creation, the regulatory environment, and eco-
nomic growth.
The 2012 Entrepreneurship Database builds
on earlier editions of the data. It incorporates
improvements in methodology as well as data
from additional low-income economies. The
2012 edition includes data from 130 econo-
mies in all, with 23 economies—including
Bangladesh, Honduras, Iraq, and Sierra
Leone—participating for the first time. In
almost all economies data are collected directly
from business registrars.
The main variable of interest is entry den-
sity, defined as the number of newly registered
companies per 1,000 working-age adults (ages
15–64) per year. As in the World Bank’s annual
Doing Business report, the units of measure-
ment are private, formal sector companies with
limited liability. Because of the exclusion of
informal firms and firms without limited liabil-
ity, the database does not provide comprehen-
sive coverage of firms in the 130 economies
surveyed.
This Note offers the first analysis of the 2012
Entrepreneurship Database. It focuses on several
questions:
Q What are the trends in new firm creation
across regions?
Q How have the financial crisis and ensuing
recovery affected entrepreneurial activity in
the formal sector?
Q What is the effect of business registration
reforms on new firm creation?
Entrepreneurship in the Wake of the Crisis Karim O. Belayachi,
Leora Klapper, and
Douglas Randall
Karim O. Belayachi
(kbelayachi@worldbank
.org) is a private sector
development specialist in
the World Bank–IFC
Global Indicators and
Analysis Department.
Leora Klapper (lklapper@
worldbank.org) is a lead
economist, and Douglas
Randall (drandall@
worldbank.org) a research
analyst, in the World
Bank’s Development
Research Group.
More information on
the Entrepreneurship
Database, as well as
complete data, can be
found athttp://www
.doingbusiness.org/
entrepreneurship.
O
C
T
O
B
E
R
2
0
1
2
N
O
T
E
N
U
M
B
E
R
3
3
4
Entrepreneurship Database 2012
2
E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P D A T A B A S E 2 0 1 2 E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P I N T H E W A K E O F T H E C R I S I S E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P D A T A B A S E 2 0 1 2 E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P I N T H E W A K E O F T H E C R I S I S
Entry density around the world
Entry density varies enormously across economies
and regions. This variation stems from differ-
ences in macroeconomic conditions, the ease of
formal business registration, the range of legal
enterprise forms, and other regulatory factors
that affect the entrepreneurial environment.
On average, 4.34 new formal companies with
limited liability (referred to as “firms” hereafter)
are registered each year per 1,000 working-age
adults in high-income economies (figure 1).
1
In
the developing world the average is 1.27. Among
developing regions, Europe and Central Asia has
the highest average entry density (2.61) and the
Middle East and North Africa the lowest (0.42).
Put another way, about 20,000 new firms register
each year in Belgium—which has an average entry
density for high-income economies in the 2012
sample. By contrast, only about 4,000–5,000 new
firms register each year in Belarus, Guatemala,
and Tunisia—each of which falls in the middle
of the distribution of entry density for develop-
ing economies and has a working-age population
similar in size to that in Belgium.
Crisis, recovery, and entrepreneurship
With tight lending practices, depressed aggre-
gate demand, and widespread uncertainty, an
economic recession is a difficult time to start a
business—and the data bear this out. Beginning
in 2008, new firm creation dropped sharply,
though by varying degrees across economies
(figure 2). In general, the speed and intensity
with which the crisis affected new firm cre-
ation varied by income level and crisis inten-
sity. Economies with higher levels of income
(GDP per capita), those with highly developed
financial systems (as measured by the ratio of
domestic credit to GDP), and those hit the hard-
est by the crisis experienced earlier and sharper
contractions in new firm creation (Klapper and
Love 2011b). In Ireland, for example, new firm
registrations fell by 29 percent between 2007
and 2009. Indeed, in high-income economies
the rate of new firm creation in 2009 was lower
than it had been in 2004.
Another way to analyze the effect of the cri-
sis is in terms of growth in entry density. Figure
3 shows the annual share of economies in the
sample experiencing positive year-on-year growth
in entry density. This method demonstrates that
the impact of the crisis on entry density evident in
figure 2 is not merely a case of a few large econo-
mies skewing aggregate trends—but instead an
adverse effect on new firm creation in the major-
ity of economies.
In each year from 2005 to 2007, more than
70 percent of economies achieved positive year-
on-year growth in entry density. But this trend
changed dramatically with the onset of the finan-
cial crisis. In 2008 just 60 percent of economies
had a higher rate of new firm creation than in
2007. By 2009 the share with positive annual
growth had dropped to 34 percent among the
entire sample of economies—and to just 6 per-
cent among high-income economies. Indeed,
Note: Entry densities are based on economy-level averages over the period 2004–11.
Source: Entrepreneurship Database, 2012 edition.
1
Fi gure Entry density by region, average, 2004–11
0
1
2
3
4
5
High-income
economies
East Asia &
Pacific
Europe &
Central Asia
Latin America
& Caribbean
Middle East
& North Africa
South Asia Sub-Saharan
Africa
Newly registered firms per 1,000 working-age adults
Note: Entry densities are based on 52 economies with data available over the entire period.
Source: Entrepreneurship Database, 2012 edition.
2
Fi gure Entry density in 52 economies, 2004–11
Newly registered firms per 1,000 working-age adults
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Low income
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
3
among high-income economies the level of entry
density dropped by an average of 10 percent
between 2007 and 2009. In some economies—
such as Denmark and Spain—the drop over the
same period exceeded 40 percent.
The impact of the financial crisis on new firm
creation in the developing world followed a dif-
ferent path. Growth in entry density in devel-
oping economies stalled in 2008, but about 70
percent of developing economies still had a
higher entry density that year than in 2007. By
2009, however, less than 50 percent of develop-
ing economies achieved positive annual growth
in entry density. It appears that the crisis hit later
and adversely affected new firm creation rates in
fewer economies in the developing world than
among high-income economies.
Moreover, the effect of the crisis in developing
economies may have been mitigated by simulta-
neous reforms that simplified business registra-
tion. According to the Doing Business 2011 report,
Peru, Croatia, and Kazakhstan were the top three
reformers in “Starting a Business” during the cri-
sis period, and each of these economies experi-
enced steady growth in new firm registrations
from 2007 to 2010.
While it’s still too early for a comprehensive
analysis of the rebound in new firm creation fol-
lowing the crisis, data from 2010 and 2011 begin to
shed light on the recovery patterns. There was an
undeniable turnaround in 2010, with 66 percent
of economies in the sample seeing an increase in
entry density over 2009. But for the majority of
economies, entry density in 2010 remained sig-
nificantly lower than in 2007. In 2011 only about
60 percent of economies saw an improvement in
the rate of new firm creation, considerably below
the precrisis average of 75 percent.
Measuring the effect of reforms
Previous research using earlier editions of the
Entrepreneurship Database has shown a signifi-
cant relationship across economies between the
cost, time, and procedures required to start a
business and new firm registrations (Klapper
and Love 2011a). These relationships persist
even after controlling for GDP per capita and
financial development (figure 4).
More interesting perhaps is that within-
economy reductions in the cost, time, and proce-
dures required to register a firm can have large
positive effects on new firm creation—though gen-
erally the reductions must exceed 50 percent to
significantly change the trajectory of new firm reg-
istrations. The research also confirms that there
are important complementarities in multiple
reforms affecting two or more of these business
registration indicators.
Six country examples illustrate the effect that
business registration reforms can have on new
firm registrations (figure 5). Morocco’s reduction
Note: Entry densities are based on 52 economies with data available over the entire period.
Source: Entrepreneurship Database, 2012 edition.
3
Fi gure Share of economies with year-on-year growth in entry density, 2005–11
Percent
0
20
40
60
80
100
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
All
High income
Developing
Note: Data refer to 93 economies.
Source: Klapper and Love 2011a.
4
Fi gure Entry density and procedures to start a business
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 5 10 15 20
Newly registered firms per 1,000 working-age adults, average, 2004–09
Procedures to start a business, average, 2004–09
is an open forum to
encourage dissemination of
public policy innovations
for private sector–led and
market-based solutions for
development. The views
published are those of the
authors and should not be
attributed to the World
Bank or any other affiliated
organizations. Nor do any
of the conclusions represent
official policy of the World
Bank or of its Executive
Directors or the countries
they represent.
To order additional copies
contact Naoki Ogiwara,
managing editor,
Room F 4P-256B,
The World Bank,
1818 H Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20433.
Telephone:
001 202 473 1871
Email:
[email protected]
Produced by Carol Siegel
Printed on recycled paper
T h i s N o t e i s a v a i l a b l e o n l i n e :
h t t p : / / w w w . w o r l d b a n k . o r g / f p d / p u b l i c p o l i c y j o u r n a l
viewpoint
E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P D A T A B A S E 2 0 1 2 E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P I N T H E W A K E O F T H E C R I S I S
of the minimum capital requirement for incor-
poration in 2006—from 700 percent of gross
national income (GNI) per capita to 67 percent—
helped to dramatically increase entry density. So
did Rwanda’s multiple changes in 2009—which
cut the procedures needed to register a business
from 8 to 2, the time from 14 days to 3, and the
minimum capital requirement from 109 percent
of GNI per capita to 10 percent. Numbers tell
the story: in 2008, 1,136 new firms registered in
Rwanda, in 2009 the number was 3,028, and in
2010 and 2011 it exceeded 4,500.
Conclusion
The 2012 Entrepreneurship Database provides
a novel first look at the pace of recovery in new
firm creation following the global financial cri-
sis. Future rounds of data will provide a more
comprehensive view of this process and support
a deeper analysis of the factors that support a
robust rebound in formal entrepreneurship. The
data set can also help guide effective policy mak-
ing and deliver new capabilities for identifying
the effect of reforms.
Note
1. Economies categorized by the International Monetary
)XQG ,0) DV RIIVKRUH ¿QDQFLDO FHQWHUV DUH H[FOXGHG
from the analysis. For the current list of these econo-
mies, see “Offshore Financial Centers (OFCs): IMF
Staff Assessments,” IMF, June 16, 2011,http://www.imf
RUJH[WHUQDO13RIFD2)&$DVS[
References
Klapper, Leora, and Inessa Love. 2011a. “The Impact
of Business Environment Reforms on New Firm
Registration.” Policy Research Working Paper 5493,
World Bank, Washington, DC.
———. 2011b. “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on
New Firm Registration.” Economics Letters 113 (1):
1–4.
World Bank. 2010. Doing Business 2011: Making a Differ-
ence for Entrepreneurs. Washington, DC: World Bank
Group.
Note: Reforms reflected in the figure were recorded by the Doing Business report as having affected its Starting a Business indicators. The year of reform (indicated by 0) is
2009 for Bangladesh and Rwanda, 2011 for Chile, 2007 for Kenya, 2006 for Morocco, and 2010 for Sweden.
Source: Entrepreneurship Database, 2012 edition; Doing Business database.
5
Fi gure Entry density before and after business registration reforms in selected economies
Index: entry density in prereform year = 100
Years before reform Years after reform
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
?4 ?3 ?2 ?1 0 1 2
Bangladesh
Chile
Kenya
Morocco
Sweden
Rwanda
doc_396752150.pdf
Entrepreneurship in the Wake of the Crisis Entrepreneurship Database 2012
viewpoint
PUBLIC POLICY FOR THE PRIVATE SECTOR
T
H
E
W
O
R
L
D
B
A
N
K
G
R
O
U
P
F
I
N
A
N
C
I
A
L
A
N
D
P
R
I
V
A
T
E
S
E
C
T
O
R
D
E
V
E
L
O
P
M
E
N
T
V
I
C
E
P
R
E
S
I
D
E
N
C
Y
New data f rom the 2012 Worl d Bank Entrepreneurshi p Database show
that the pace of new f i rm creati on i n most economi es has begun to
recover af ter the sharp drops experi enced duri ng the 2008–09
f i nanci al cri si s. The database provi des a uni que i ndi cator of new
busi ness regi strati on around the worl d that can be used to study
trends wi thi n economi es and regi ons, the ef f ect of ref orms, and the
f actors that f oster dynami c pri vate sector growth.
Entrepreneurial activity is a pillar of economic
growth. In the wake of the 2008–09 financial
crisis, policy makers, private sector leaders, and
researchers are renewing their focus on job
growth and new firm creation. Often missing
from their efforts, however, are internation-
ally comparable, time-series data on formal
entrepreneurship. The newly updated World
Bank Entrepreneurship Database is a critical
source of data supporting the measurement
of entrepreneurial activity across economies
and over time. The data allow a deeper under-
standing of the relationship between new firm
creation, the regulatory environment, and eco-
nomic growth.
The 2012 Entrepreneurship Database builds
on earlier editions of the data. It incorporates
improvements in methodology as well as data
from additional low-income economies. The
2012 edition includes data from 130 econo-
mies in all, with 23 economies—including
Bangladesh, Honduras, Iraq, and Sierra
Leone—participating for the first time. In
almost all economies data are collected directly
from business registrars.
The main variable of interest is entry den-
sity, defined as the number of newly registered
companies per 1,000 working-age adults (ages
15–64) per year. As in the World Bank’s annual
Doing Business report, the units of measure-
ment are private, formal sector companies with
limited liability. Because of the exclusion of
informal firms and firms without limited liabil-
ity, the database does not provide comprehen-
sive coverage of firms in the 130 economies
surveyed.
This Note offers the first analysis of the 2012
Entrepreneurship Database. It focuses on several
questions:
Q What are the trends in new firm creation
across regions?
Q How have the financial crisis and ensuing
recovery affected entrepreneurial activity in
the formal sector?
Q What is the effect of business registration
reforms on new firm creation?
Entrepreneurship in the Wake of the Crisis Karim O. Belayachi,
Leora Klapper, and
Douglas Randall
Karim O. Belayachi
(kbelayachi@worldbank
.org) is a private sector
development specialist in
the World Bank–IFC
Global Indicators and
Analysis Department.
Leora Klapper (lklapper@
worldbank.org) is a lead
economist, and Douglas
Randall (drandall@
worldbank.org) a research
analyst, in the World
Bank’s Development
Research Group.
More information on
the Entrepreneurship
Database, as well as
complete data, can be
found athttp://www
.doingbusiness.org/
entrepreneurship.
O
C
T
O
B
E
R
2
0
1
2
N
O
T
E
N
U
M
B
E
R
3
3
4
Entrepreneurship Database 2012
2
E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P D A T A B A S E 2 0 1 2 E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P I N T H E W A K E O F T H E C R I S I S E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P D A T A B A S E 2 0 1 2 E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P I N T H E W A K E O F T H E C R I S I S
Entry density around the world
Entry density varies enormously across economies
and regions. This variation stems from differ-
ences in macroeconomic conditions, the ease of
formal business registration, the range of legal
enterprise forms, and other regulatory factors
that affect the entrepreneurial environment.
On average, 4.34 new formal companies with
limited liability (referred to as “firms” hereafter)
are registered each year per 1,000 working-age
adults in high-income economies (figure 1).
1
In
the developing world the average is 1.27. Among
developing regions, Europe and Central Asia has
the highest average entry density (2.61) and the
Middle East and North Africa the lowest (0.42).
Put another way, about 20,000 new firms register
each year in Belgium—which has an average entry
density for high-income economies in the 2012
sample. By contrast, only about 4,000–5,000 new
firms register each year in Belarus, Guatemala,
and Tunisia—each of which falls in the middle
of the distribution of entry density for develop-
ing economies and has a working-age population
similar in size to that in Belgium.
Crisis, recovery, and entrepreneurship
With tight lending practices, depressed aggre-
gate demand, and widespread uncertainty, an
economic recession is a difficult time to start a
business—and the data bear this out. Beginning
in 2008, new firm creation dropped sharply,
though by varying degrees across economies
(figure 2). In general, the speed and intensity
with which the crisis affected new firm cre-
ation varied by income level and crisis inten-
sity. Economies with higher levels of income
(GDP per capita), those with highly developed
financial systems (as measured by the ratio of
domestic credit to GDP), and those hit the hard-
est by the crisis experienced earlier and sharper
contractions in new firm creation (Klapper and
Love 2011b). In Ireland, for example, new firm
registrations fell by 29 percent between 2007
and 2009. Indeed, in high-income economies
the rate of new firm creation in 2009 was lower
than it had been in 2004.
Another way to analyze the effect of the cri-
sis is in terms of growth in entry density. Figure
3 shows the annual share of economies in the
sample experiencing positive year-on-year growth
in entry density. This method demonstrates that
the impact of the crisis on entry density evident in
figure 2 is not merely a case of a few large econo-
mies skewing aggregate trends—but instead an
adverse effect on new firm creation in the major-
ity of economies.
In each year from 2005 to 2007, more than
70 percent of economies achieved positive year-
on-year growth in entry density. But this trend
changed dramatically with the onset of the finan-
cial crisis. In 2008 just 60 percent of economies
had a higher rate of new firm creation than in
2007. By 2009 the share with positive annual
growth had dropped to 34 percent among the
entire sample of economies—and to just 6 per-
cent among high-income economies. Indeed,
Note: Entry densities are based on economy-level averages over the period 2004–11.
Source: Entrepreneurship Database, 2012 edition.
1
Fi gure Entry density by region, average, 2004–11
0
1
2
3
4
5
High-income
economies
East Asia &
Pacific
Europe &
Central Asia
Latin America
& Caribbean
Middle East
& North Africa
South Asia Sub-Saharan
Africa
Newly registered firms per 1,000 working-age adults
Note: Entry densities are based on 52 economies with data available over the entire period.
Source: Entrepreneurship Database, 2012 edition.
2
Fi gure Entry density in 52 economies, 2004–11
Newly registered firms per 1,000 working-age adults
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Low income
Lower middle income
Upper middle income
High income
3
among high-income economies the level of entry
density dropped by an average of 10 percent
between 2007 and 2009. In some economies—
such as Denmark and Spain—the drop over the
same period exceeded 40 percent.
The impact of the financial crisis on new firm
creation in the developing world followed a dif-
ferent path. Growth in entry density in devel-
oping economies stalled in 2008, but about 70
percent of developing economies still had a
higher entry density that year than in 2007. By
2009, however, less than 50 percent of develop-
ing economies achieved positive annual growth
in entry density. It appears that the crisis hit later
and adversely affected new firm creation rates in
fewer economies in the developing world than
among high-income economies.
Moreover, the effect of the crisis in developing
economies may have been mitigated by simulta-
neous reforms that simplified business registra-
tion. According to the Doing Business 2011 report,
Peru, Croatia, and Kazakhstan were the top three
reformers in “Starting a Business” during the cri-
sis period, and each of these economies experi-
enced steady growth in new firm registrations
from 2007 to 2010.
While it’s still too early for a comprehensive
analysis of the rebound in new firm creation fol-
lowing the crisis, data from 2010 and 2011 begin to
shed light on the recovery patterns. There was an
undeniable turnaround in 2010, with 66 percent
of economies in the sample seeing an increase in
entry density over 2009. But for the majority of
economies, entry density in 2010 remained sig-
nificantly lower than in 2007. In 2011 only about
60 percent of economies saw an improvement in
the rate of new firm creation, considerably below
the precrisis average of 75 percent.
Measuring the effect of reforms
Previous research using earlier editions of the
Entrepreneurship Database has shown a signifi-
cant relationship across economies between the
cost, time, and procedures required to start a
business and new firm registrations (Klapper
and Love 2011a). These relationships persist
even after controlling for GDP per capita and
financial development (figure 4).
More interesting perhaps is that within-
economy reductions in the cost, time, and proce-
dures required to register a firm can have large
positive effects on new firm creation—though gen-
erally the reductions must exceed 50 percent to
significantly change the trajectory of new firm reg-
istrations. The research also confirms that there
are important complementarities in multiple
reforms affecting two or more of these business
registration indicators.
Six country examples illustrate the effect that
business registration reforms can have on new
firm registrations (figure 5). Morocco’s reduction
Note: Entry densities are based on 52 economies with data available over the entire period.
Source: Entrepreneurship Database, 2012 edition.
3
Fi gure Share of economies with year-on-year growth in entry density, 2005–11
Percent
0
20
40
60
80
100
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
All
High income
Developing
Note: Data refer to 93 economies.
Source: Klapper and Love 2011a.
4
Fi gure Entry density and procedures to start a business
0
2
4
6
8
10
0 5 10 15 20
Newly registered firms per 1,000 working-age adults, average, 2004–09
Procedures to start a business, average, 2004–09
is an open forum to
encourage dissemination of
public policy innovations
for private sector–led and
market-based solutions for
development. The views
published are those of the
authors and should not be
attributed to the World
Bank or any other affiliated
organizations. Nor do any
of the conclusions represent
official policy of the World
Bank or of its Executive
Directors or the countries
they represent.
To order additional copies
contact Naoki Ogiwara,
managing editor,
Room F 4P-256B,
The World Bank,
1818 H Street, NW,
Washington, DC 20433.
Telephone:
001 202 473 1871
Email:
[email protected]
Produced by Carol Siegel
Printed on recycled paper
T h i s N o t e i s a v a i l a b l e o n l i n e :
h t t p : / / w w w . w o r l d b a n k . o r g / f p d / p u b l i c p o l i c y j o u r n a l
viewpoint
E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P D A T A B A S E 2 0 1 2 E N T R E P R E N E U R S H I P I N T H E W A K E O F T H E C R I S I S
of the minimum capital requirement for incor-
poration in 2006—from 700 percent of gross
national income (GNI) per capita to 67 percent—
helped to dramatically increase entry density. So
did Rwanda’s multiple changes in 2009—which
cut the procedures needed to register a business
from 8 to 2, the time from 14 days to 3, and the
minimum capital requirement from 109 percent
of GNI per capita to 10 percent. Numbers tell
the story: in 2008, 1,136 new firms registered in
Rwanda, in 2009 the number was 3,028, and in
2010 and 2011 it exceeded 4,500.
Conclusion
The 2012 Entrepreneurship Database provides
a novel first look at the pace of recovery in new
firm creation following the global financial cri-
sis. Future rounds of data will provide a more
comprehensive view of this process and support
a deeper analysis of the factors that support a
robust rebound in formal entrepreneurship. The
data set can also help guide effective policy mak-
ing and deliver new capabilities for identifying
the effect of reforms.
Note
1. Economies categorized by the International Monetary
)XQG ,0) DV RIIVKRUH ¿QDQFLDO FHQWHUV DUH H[FOXGHG
from the analysis. For the current list of these econo-
mies, see “Offshore Financial Centers (OFCs): IMF
Staff Assessments,” IMF, June 16, 2011,http://www.imf
RUJH[WHUQDO13RIFD2)&$DVS[
References
Klapper, Leora, and Inessa Love. 2011a. “The Impact
of Business Environment Reforms on New Firm
Registration.” Policy Research Working Paper 5493,
World Bank, Washington, DC.
———. 2011b. “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on
New Firm Registration.” Economics Letters 113 (1):
1–4.
World Bank. 2010. Doing Business 2011: Making a Differ-
ence for Entrepreneurs. Washington, DC: World Bank
Group.
Note: Reforms reflected in the figure were recorded by the Doing Business report as having affected its Starting a Business indicators. The year of reform (indicated by 0) is
2009 for Bangladesh and Rwanda, 2011 for Chile, 2007 for Kenya, 2006 for Morocco, and 2010 for Sweden.
Source: Entrepreneurship Database, 2012 edition; Doing Business database.
5
Fi gure Entry density before and after business registration reforms in selected economies
Index: entry density in prereform year = 100
Years before reform Years after reform
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
?4 ?3 ?2 ?1 0 1 2
Bangladesh
Chile
Kenya
Morocco
Sweden
Rwanda
doc_396752150.pdf