Map of the Asia-Pacific countries \ Asia-Pacific entrepreneurs trends by country
Map of the Asia-Pacific countries
Map of the Asia-Pacific countries

In these challenging times, entrepreneurs can take advantage of opportunities in the Asia– Pacific region. Every entrepreneur reading this book will one day be dealing afar and anear. Just consider the potential in the top Asian countries with combined populations of 2.5 billion.[2]  Add to that another 1.7 billion in South Asia, a whopping East Asia & Pacific GDP of $22 trillion[3] buying more than 65% of Australia’s exports.[4]  Two-thirds of the emerging middle class resides on Australia’s doorstep.[5]  With self-promotion and education, Asia-Pacific entrepreneurs    — even more so than entrepreneurs from Europe or America — are in a great position to leverage their skills and capitalise on a greater understanding of and insight into Asian cultures.

I believe we are better off in a world in which we are trading and networking and communicating and sharing ideas. But that also means that cultures are colliding . . . You [entrepreneurs] are the bridge. You’re the glue.” – Barack Obama.[1]

Hear what the word ‘entrepreneurship’ means in Malay, Tagalog, Chinese, Thai and many other Asian languages.

The Asia-Pacific region shows its greatest strengths in Human Capital and Product Innovation.  As well, they have highly educated populations that are well trained in business and able to move freely in the labor market. They are also producing products that are new to customers and integrating new technology.[6]  Vietnam is high expenditure on education , Brunei is a centre for capital, Philippines is tops in ICT service exports, and Thailand has the most trademark applications.[7]

The new breed of global entrepreneur has grown of age using global networks for resources, design and distribution. The trend has escalated the global economy, and by all accounts, the pace and magnitude of this global economy are likely to continue to accelerate. Adept at recognising opportunities, the new breed of global entrepreneur understands that success in the global marketplace requires agility, certainty, ingenuity and a global perspective. These global entrepreneurs and social entrepreneurs are the true vanguard in the second decade of the twenty-first century.

The following abbreviations are used in the following sections: GII Global Innovation Index; GEI Global Entrepreneurship Index; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor.

TOP ENTREPRENEURIAL COUNTRIES IN AUSTRALASIA[8]

Entrepreneurship rates for Asia-Pacific countries
Entrepreneurship rates for Asia-Pacific countries

Source:  Global Entrepreneurship Index (GEI)[9]

INDICATORS OF ASIA–PACIFIC ENTREPRENEURSHIP, 2018[10]

Asia-Pacific entrepreneurship indicators (2019)
Asia-Pacific entrepreneurship indicators (2019)

Asia-Pacific entrepreneurs trends by country

AUSTRALIA

Sydney Opera House
Australia ranks in the top five entrepreneurial countries in the world. Image by skeeze. https://pixabay.com/en/sydney-opera-house-night-harbor-1169155/

With GEI ranking of 75 per cent, Australia ranks first in the Asia-Pacific region, ahead of economic powerhouses China, Singapore, Hong Kong, and Japan. It ranks also in the top five entrepreneurial countries, with the United States (84 per cent), Switzerland (80 per cent), Canada (79 per cent), and the United Kingdom (78 per cent) in the Global Entrepreneurship Index.  Its innovation potential scores are lower: twenty-third in the world at the rank of China and New Zealand.  With a low rate of necessity entrepreneurship, data clearly show that Australia compares well with other major economies in terms of the ‘quality’ of entrepreneurial activities being pursued. More than half of Australians believe entrepreneurship is a desirable career choice.  Fifteen per cent of Australians are currently starting up a business (2016), compared to 17 per cent in the Philippines, or 14 per cent in Indonesia.  At 9 per cent, Australia is very highly in corporate entrepreneurship.  Forty-two percent of Australians are so fearful that they might fail that they will never start a business (compared to 22 per cent in New Zealand). One hurdle for Australian entrepreneurs is that relatively few Australian entrepreneurs are internationally oriented, far fewer than, for example, New Zealanders or Hong Kongers.  Experts do score Australia high in physical infrastructure, cultural support for entrepreneurship, and internal market-openness when compared with other innovation-driven economies.  But the start-up failure rate is also high at 42 per cent.  Australia is one of the world’s top countries in terms of ease of doing business, but the total corporate tax rate is very high at 47.5 per cent. Australian entrepreneurs also face numerous compliance hurdles, for example in building and construction, and getting electricity.  The federal government offers a range of programs for business start-up and early stage businesses. In addition, each state government has its own programs.[11]

NEW ZEALAND

New Zealand, Auckland
Conditions for entrepreneurs in New Zealand are top in the world.

Paradoxically, New Zealand is a laggard in its entrepreneurial record-keeping but a star in its performance.[12] The last time it was measured (in 2005), New Zealand at 17.6 per cent was surpassed only by Thailand. The indigenous Polynesian population, the New Zealand Maori, were every bit as entrepreneurial as European New Zealanders, and had higher rates in some measures. Maori women had the world’s third-highest opportunity entrepreneurship rate and only a moderate rate of necessity entrepreneurship. Maori males had much higher rates of necessity entrepreneurship, about five times the rate of the general male population. Nonetheless, conditions for entrepreneurs in New Zealand are top in the world. New Zealand and Singapore generally share the top two positions in the world in terms of ease of doing business. It only takes one procedure and minimal expense to start a business in New Zealand. It is the world’s top economy in ease of getting credit, registering property, and protecting investors.  Surprisingly, New Zealand is a laggard in export/import compliance costs and procedures.[13]

HONG KONG SAR, CHINA

Since its merger with the People’s Republic of China, Hong Kong has witness a ‘staggering’ increase in entrepreneurial activities.

Hong Kong has the highest GEI in Asia, at 67% or 13th place.  It is also par with France in the Innovation Index.  GEM shows about 9.4% of the adult population are currently starting a business, and the Perceived Opportunities rate is very high.  Recently research shows a ‘staggering’ increase in entrepreneurial activities from 2009 to 2016.  Education and training are high, and capital is available from investors.  More than half the population sees entrepreneurship as a good career choice.  Fear of failure is relatively low, at one-third of the population fearing failure of a start-up.  Hong Kong has an excellent general environment for business, ranking fifth in the world in easy of doing business.  Transparency in construction permits, getting electricity, paying taxes all contribute to a free business environment.  A freer China would produce and attract more entrepreneurs. Instead, Hong Kong is faced with the spectre of increased regulation and interference from Beijing. China’s policies dissuade many entrepreneurs and have a chilling effect on Hong Kong’s entrepreneurship.[14]

INDONESIA

Indonesia, Jakarta
Indonesia is also one of the few countries where women surpass men in their entrepreneurial rate

By some estimates, Indonesia will surpass Germany and Japan to become the world’s fourth-largest economy by 2050, after China, India, and the United States. As an efficiency-driven economy, it is difficult to say when it will reach the stage of being an innovation-driven economy because its workforce is not equipped with the skills, knowledge or health that are necessary to be innovation-driven.  About 90 per cent of all Indonesian firms are non-entrepreneurial micro-enterprises, typically informal, low-tech and specialised in trade and service industries, generally ‘trading on the margins’, and battling government intervention and corruption. GEM measures a moderate (by Asian standards) 14% of the population as being entrepreneurial active.  Indonesia is also one of the few countries where women surpass men in their entrepreneurial rate, and Indonesia’s women entrepreneurs report higher levels of opportunity motives than their male counterparts.  But GEI scores Indonesia at the bottom in terms of entrepreneurial potential.  Clearly, Indonesia has more potential, especially with the support of the individual attributes and social values.  According to the World Bank’s ‘Doing Business’ assessment, it’s a hard slog for entrepreneurs in Indonesia due to compliance. Starting a business takes 23 days and costs one-tenth of an annual salary. Total tax rate is relatively low at 30 per cent of profit, but count on 207 hours to prepare it! And don’t get involved in contract disputes in Indonesia: it will take 403 days and cost 70% of the claim.  It is notable that both men and women are equally likely to be engaged in entrepreneurial activity (highest in the world), but the average Indonesian is low in terms of opportunity identification, risk taking, and availability of capital.  Three-quarters of Indonesia see entrepreneurship as a desirable career choice, and half the population perceives good opportunities to start a firm in their area.[15]

MALAYSIA

Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur
Malaysia has one of the world’s lowest rates of entrepreneurial activity.  

Indonesia’s neighbour is a totally different case. The Malaysian government must be disappointed in its entrepreneurial performance.  GEM ranks it at 4.7 per cent TEA, and the GEI puts it in fifty-eighth place.  Its innovation ranking matches that of Bulgaria and Poland.  While the economy has the finance and physical infrastructure to support entrepreneurship, Malaysia has one of the world’s lowest rates of entrepreneurial activity.  The average entrepreneur in Malaysia is likely to be 35–44 years of age, more likely to be male than female, with an upper secondary level of education and a mid-range household income.  Only five per cent of Malaysian adults intend to start a business.  Malaysians are also low in believing they have the skills and knowledge to be an entrepreneur.  Malaysia has one of the world’s lowest rate of ‘status for entrepreneurs’ and for ‘desirable career choice’.  Malaysian entrepreneurs, such as they are, have low international horizons compared to Indonesia, not to mention Singapore.  The World Bank gives Malaysia a poor ‘ease of doing business’ score.  Factors such as bureaucracy and poor education and training have impeded entrepreneurial growth. Previously, it took 3 procedures to register a company, now it takes nine.  To export one container requires forty-five hours of paperwork.  On a positive note, the fear of failure rate among Malaysians has fallen from 65 per cent in 2009 to 36 per cent in 2016.  Malaysia has the best cluster development and ICT use.  It has strengths in STEM graduates, high-tech imports and exports, and creative goods exports, among other indicators.  The Malaysian government is leading a strong initiative in promoting entrepreneurship, and particularly nurtures ethnic Malays (or Bumiputras) in order to address the social and economic inequities resulting from the previous colonial policy. Positioning middle-class Malays as the main agents of economic growth (while discriminating against the Chinese entrepreneurial classes), the government has tried to adopt a variety of supporting mechanisms and policies for Malay entrepreneurs, including funding, physical infrastructure and business advisory services. Malaysians who are turning novel ideas into new businesses are strongly supported by government, which had set the ambitious goal of having small- and medium-sized enterprises comprise a larger share of Malaysia’s GDP. The low levels of entrepreneurial propensity as well as activity as compared to other efficiency-driven economies is indicative that the entrepreneurial programs initiated have yet to bear fruit and will require greater efforts in the short term. Entrepreneurship education, which is slowly being introduced, will need to be accelerated, its quality improved and importance stressed.[16]

PHILIPPINES

Philippines, Manila
Helping entrepreneurs move from founding easy-to-replicate businesses for self-employment to the type of innovative, highly-productive and fast-growing ventures that result in real economic growth.

In the Philippines, seventeen per cent of the population could be counted as entrepreneurs by the GEM definition.  GEI finds low scores on identifying opportunities, cultural support, and available capital.  In innovation, the country is on par with Morocco.  The average Filipino entrepreneur is young, 18–34 years old, married with at least secondary schooling. Significantly, these inwardly focused necessity entrepreneurs count a large proportion of females. More than half (53 per cent) of all Filipinos have a very positive view of the entrepreneurial opportunities in their country. Seventy per cent believe they have the entrepreneurial capabilities needed to start a business. Filipino entrepreneurs see owning a business as a path to being independent as well as the opportunity to earn a living and improve one’s economic lot. There is also a very high gender equity where the Philippines registered the highest among 65 economies.  Challenges for Filipinos include a lack of research and development (R&D) infrastructure, lack of access to technology and especially lack of financing.  Government policies, structure, and bureaucracy are seen as constraints to growth and sustainability of entrepreneurial undertaking.  And this fervent entrepreneurial spirit also confronts considerable challenges when it comes to compliance and regulations. Entrepreneurs lack financial support and working capital, hindering business expansion; and there is little training aimed at expanding and sustaining businesses.  The Philippines is in the world’s bottom rank in ease of starting a business where it takes 16 different signatures.  It also scores poorly on compliance for permits, property registration, credit, investor protection, and contract enforcement.  Another disincentive is the country’s high business taxation rate (42.5 per cent).  Helping entrepreneurs move from founding easy-to-replicate businesses for self-employment to the type of innovative, highly-productive and fast-growing ventures that result in real economic growth is a challenge for the country. [17]

THAILAND

Thailand, Bangkok
Half of the Thai population are so fearful of failure that they would never start a business.

Thailand is moderately high at 17.2 per cent as a percentage of entrepreneurs in the adult population, according to GEM.  GEI puts it in lower ranks on par with Iran and Panama.  GII ranks Thailand with Mongolia in terms of its innovation potential.  GEI also ranks Thailand poorly in opportunity identification, business skills, and risk taking.  The average entrepreneur is between 25 and 54 years of age, with the majority (nearly 60 per cent) engaged in entrepreneurship when they are between 35 and 44 years old.  Quite troubling is that more than half of the Thai population are so fearful of failure that they would never start a business, but Thai culture is very forgiving. Nonetheless, three-quarters of Thais see becoming an entrepreneur as a desirable career choice, and one with high status. The major enablers in Thailand include the dynamic internal market, favourable cultural and societal norms that support high female rates of entrepreneurship; and access to physical and services infrastructure.  Thailand has a very high established business rate, considerably higher than its TEA rate (27 per cent compared to 17 per cent).  Entrepreneurship in Thailand is constrained by the lack of financial support, government policies, education and training, and the general capacity for entrepreneurship in terms of innovation and creativity. Financial constraints include a general lack of funding for start-ups and small businesses. Educational quality is seen as poor, which hinders creativity and the development of leadership skills; practical teaching and the teaching of entrepreneurial concepts is lacking. Fortunately, entrepreneurs find a relatively mild compliance environment in Thailand, according to the World Bank. Registering a business requires five procedures; getting electricity three.  The total tax rate is only 28.7 per cent and export procedures are very quick. Cultural aspects of entrepreneurship are important in Thailand because many entrepreneurs come from Chinese or part-Chinese families. Their entrepreneurial spirit has helped expand entrepreneurial activity and speed up the economic development process. Thai entrepreneurs benefit from the hard-working values of Confucianism but also the Buddhist belief in tolerance of failures.[18]

CHINA

China, Shanghai
The average entrepreneur in China is male, 25–34 years of age, with a high school level of education.

Entrepreneurial activity in China has decreased over the past few years. GEI puts China entrepreneurially in mid-rank on par with Spain and Turkey.  GEM reports that the rate of total entrepreneurial activity is just over ten percent (compared to 16 percent in 2014).  The average entrepreneur in China is male, 25–34 years of age, with a high school level of education. He is more likely to be opportunity-motivated and engaged in the customer service industry. Chinese also are likely to say that they have had an idea to start a business and 21 per cent of Chinese adults intend to start a business within three years. Fewer Chinese see good opportunities to start a business, but they aver they have the required skills and knowledge to start a business than their Asian neighbours.  Fear of failure has grown from 30 per cent to 50 per cent in the past three years even though 70 per cent say starting a business is a desirable career choice, and 78 per cent say successful entrepreneurs receive high status.  In terms of innovation, GII calls China an R&D ‘champion’ as the only middle-income economy that closing the gap with the developed countries.  Chinese experts rate their entrepreneurial ecosystem relatively high compared to its neighbours. Physical infrastructure, the educational system, and the internal market size all are pluses. Many Chinese entrepreneurs say they face barriers, and their entrepreneurial activity is largely necessity-driven rather than being opportunity-driven.  The major problem for entrepreneurs in China is the compliance costs. China stands at rank 78 in the world in terms of ease of doing business. Just the costs of getting electricity will cost 3.5 times average per capita income. It also falls down in protecting investors and compliance costs in trade across borders. The tax rate is 67%.  Various leading companies stand accused of corruption and of colluding with corrupt officials to fleece the public coffers and engage in blatant frauds. But investors have poured into Chinese firms, especially in financial-technology investments.  Entrepreneurs also benefit from Chinese shoppers, who are voracious and adventurous.[19]

INDIA

India, Mumbai
 Where India falls down is in the extraordinary compliance and bureaucracy which its entrepreneurs must endure.

Indians enjoy an entrepreneur-friendly environment. A new India that is young, entrepreneurial, skilled and competitive is emerging and foreign investment continues to increase, coming not from the traditional families.  GEM reports that India’s TEA stands at 10.6 per cent, only mid-rank in Asia (compare this to 39% in Senegal), and its rate of necessity entrepreneurship is high. Its GEI is poorer, about equal to Bulgaria and Panama.  Essentially, India produces too few entrepreneurs for its stage of development.  There are more early-stage entrepreneurs in the 25–34 age group than any other age range. Yet Indian entrepreneurs have low horizons in considering international opportunities.  This is consistent with low beliefs about entrepreneurship as a good career choice and high status for entrepreneurs.  As far as India’s innovation potential, GII shows that India consistently outperforms on innovation relative to its GDP per capita because of improvement in investment, tertiary education, publications and universities, ICT services exports, and its innovation clusters.  Well planted in policymakers is the need for innovation investments leading to more and more dynamic R&D-intensive firms that are active in patenting, high-technology production, and exports.  Being an entrepreneur in India carries a high status.  More than half of Indians are considering leaving their current jobs to start their own business.  Gender differences exist, with male participation representing about three- quarters of the total of entrepreneurs. The lower participation of women in entrepreneurial activity may be attributed to a societal predisposition towards men being more risk-taking than women.  Where India falls down is in the extraordinary compliance and bureaucracy which its entrepreneurs must endure. It ranks in the lowest quartile of the world in ease of doing business, starting a business, registering property, taxation and contract enforcement. Just getting electricity in India costs ninety-seven times the per capita income! Its only bright spot is the protection it offers investors. Entrepreneurs in India are hindered by government regulation and lack of entrepreneurial education, according to GEM.[20]  

JAPAN

Japan, Tokyo
Japan is Asia’s basket case of entrepreneurship.

Japan is Asia’s basket case of entrepreneurship. At an astoundingly low rate of 3.8 per cent, Japan has the world’s lowest rate of entrepreneurial activity.  GEI puts it at 52 percent (United States 84 percent).  Equally poor is the business ownership rate in the general population, at only 7.2 per cent.  On the innovation side it does much better. Despite enduring economic setbacks, Japan has continued to be a driving force of global innovation since the late 1970s. It scored fourteenth place in the GII about equal to Iceland.  The ‘quality’ of its innovations is eclipsed only by the United States. The country is ranked in the top 10 for research and development (3rd), information and communication technologies (5th), trade, competition, and market scale (3rd), knowledge absorption (8th), knowledge creation (9th), and knowledge diffusion (10th).  The average entrepreneur in Japan is over 45 years of age, male and has a bachelor degree. He starts up his business in the industry where he worked.  Japanese demonstrate the lowest levels of perceived opportunities and capabilities in comparison to the reference groups.  Most conditions for entrepreneurs are assessed rather negatively. Cultural support for entrepreneurship appears to be the biggest concern. Only 7.3 per cent of Japanese (lowest in the world) see good opportunities to start a firm in the area where they live, while only 12.2 per cent believe they have the required skills and knowledge to start a business. Fifty-five per cent say that fear of failure would prevent them from setting up a business. Only 2.5 per cent (world lowest) of Japanese adults intend to start a business within three years. Thirty-one per cent say starting a business is a desirable career choice, and 56 per cent say successful entrepreneurs receive high status.  Experts say cultural risk aversion, funding and an inflexible labour market remain as challenges. Another obstacle is Japan’s social policy, which props up ‘elephants’ (old, established inferior firms). The result is that too many inefficient companies survive, making it difficult for new firms to gain a toehold. For example, the top Japanese consumer electronics firms haven’t changed in over 70 years, while 8 of the top 21 US electronic firms did not exist before 1970.[21]

SOUTH KOREA

South Korea, Seoul
Just 14 per cent of Koreans see good opportunities to start a business.

Korea is a tale of two experiences.  In the general population, GEM’s South Korea TEA rate is a poorly ranked at 6.9 per cent.  GEI also positions it poorly about co-equal to Slovenia.  Only seven per cent of Korean adults intend to start a business within three years.  In general, most Korean entrepreneurs’ aspirations are low, simply as a means to find work in low-productivity sectors such as retail, and food and beverage.  Perceived opportunities and perceived capabilities are low in the Korean general population.  Just 14 per cent of Koreans see good opportunities to start a business, while only 27 per cent believe they have the required skills and knowledge to start a business. Thirty-eight per cent say that fear of failure would prevent them from setting up a business.  Only 38 per cent say it is a desirable career choice.  However, in innovation, it is clearly another story, with high levels of entrepreneurial activity and the GII putting the country’s potential on par with Ireland.  Start-ups are especially powerful in creative goods and services, industrial designs, and knowledge creation, patents, human capital and research.  The typical Korean early-stage entrepreneur is a male engineer, 35–44 years of age, English-speaker, from an upper-third income level.  National policy regulations and government programs support entrepreneurial activity relatively well.   Korea is a great place to do business. It ranks fourth in the world in terms of ease of doing business. The taxation rate is 33 per cent, investors are protected, contracts enforced, and insolvency streamlined. The biggest enablers of entrepreneurship in Korea are good physical infrastructure, effective government policies and market dynamics. The biggest constraints are education and training (primary and secondary education in particular), commercial and service infrastructures, and financial support. The country’s areas of relative weakness include ICT services, publishing, mobility, and investment inflows.[22] 

SINGAPORE

Singapore
Singapore’s rate of established business ownership is the lowest in Asia

Singapore, due to its strategic location, top-notch infrastructure and political stability, is regarded as the friendliest place in the world to do business. The Singapore government has been providing start- ups with substantial support, including office space, training, mentoring and incubation programs, along with tax and funding incentives.  Lessons have been learned and the total rate of entrepreneurial activity in Singapore has climbed from 4.9 per cent in 2003 to 11 per cent in 2014.  Singapore’s entrepreneurial profile is in some ways comparable to other innovation-driven economies, with a high level of risk acceptance, cultural support, human capital, product innovation, process innovation, and internationalization. The institutional support for entrepreneurship in Singapore exceeds other innovation-driven economies, especially in government programs, policies, regulations and physical infrastructure. Ranked top in the World Bank’s Doing Business index, especially in trading across borders, contract enforcement, permits and compliance, and investor protection. All of this makes it curious that Singapore’s rate of established business ownership is the lowest in Asia – due probably to the number of huge corporations squeezing out small business.[23]

TAIWAN

Taipei at night
Taiwan’s entrepreneurial activity is quite on par with other innovation-driven countries such as Singapore and the United States.  

With 8 per cent of the adult population counted as entrepreneurs, Taiwan’s entrepreneurial activity is quite on par with other innovation-driven countries such as Singapore and the United States.  Third most entrepreneurial country in Asia, according to GEI, Taiwan is particularly strong in product innovation, risk capital, technology, and human capital.  Its international orientation, necessity rate and proportion of female entrepreneurs also are similar to these countries. The majority of Taiwanese under 40 have started or want to start their own businesses to escape persistently low wages.  Curiously, Taiwan has a relatively high rate of fear of failure (on a par with Japan and Malaysia), yet entrepreneurship is considered a desirable career choice. The biggest enablers of entrepreneurship in Taiwan are positive cultural and social norms, good access to physical infrastructure and strong support of female entrepreneurship. The constraints on entrepreneurship are inadequate education and training at primary levels, and inadequate commercial and services infrastructure.  World Bank ranks Taiwan fifteenth in the world in its ‘ease of doing business’ index.  Starting a business and getting electricity each require only three procedures.[24] 

VIETNAM

Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
One fifth of all Vietnamese own a business.

Vietnam has experienced spectacular development in the twenty-first century largely due to its entrepreneurs. It enjoys a high rate of established business ownership (almost one-fifth of the population), and the proportion counted as entrepreneurs is 13.7 per cent, similar to China and just behind the leaders Thailand and Indonesia.  The rate of opportunity identification is increasing, but the typical Vietnamese fears he or she does not have the capability to run a start-up. Fear of failure is at 45 percent (compared to 35 percent in other factor-driven economies).  At 22 percent, there has been an increase in number of adults desiring to start a business in the next three years, but this lags behind other factor-driven economies (37 per cent).  More likely to be female, Vietnamese entrepreneurs are generally 25 to 54 years of age and come from a higher income background, have a university degree and actively seek out business opportunities. They are supported by their family in their business activities, which tend to be in the consumer service sector. Culturally, there is a positive perception of entrepreneurs and the role of women is increasingly valued by society.  Vietnam has been improving its innovation performance. especially in expenditure on education. ICT use, foreign direct investment. Where Vietnam is most challenged is tertiary enrolment, cluster development, and university/industry research collaboration.  In terms of business conditions, Vietnam is definitely in the low-to-moderate rank globally according to the World Bank.  Just starting a business requires 9 different signatures; meanwhile most businesses never register. Getting electricity in Vietnam costs more than 19 years of per capita income! Tax compliance is highly costly both in time and total tax rate (38 per cent). This hinders business development, particularly affecting small and medium enterprises (SMEs), which make up more than 95 per cent of Vietnamese businesses.[25]

Bibliography

[1] Obama, Barak. “Remarks and a Panel Discussion at the Global Entrepreneurship Summit at Stanford University in Stanford, California,” June 24, 2016. http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=117875&st=entrepreneurship&st1=; Ward, Marguerite. “Barack Obama to Entrepreneurs: You’re the Glue in a Changing World,” June 24, 2016. https://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/24/barack-obama-to-entrepreneurs-youre-the-glue-in-a-changing-world.html;

[2] China, 1,409,517,397; Indonesia, 263,991,379; Pakistan, 197,015,955; Bangladesh, 164,669,751; Japan, 127,484,450; Philippines, 104,918,090; Viet Nam, 95,540,800; Thailand, 69,037,513; Myanmar, 53,370,609; South Korea, 50,982,212. Worldometers. (2017). Asian Countries by Population (2017) – Worldometers. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.worldometers.info/population/countries-in-asia-by-population/

[3] World Bank. (n.d.). World GDP. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.CD

[4] Commission. (2017). Why Australia: Benchmark Report. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://www.austrade.gov.au/International/Invest/Resources/Benchmark-Report

[5] Kharas, H. (2017, February 28). The unprecedented expansion of the global middle class. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-unprecedented-expansion-of-the-global-middle-class-2/

OECD. (2017). An emerging middle class -. Retrieved from http://oecdobserver.org/news/fullstory.php/aid/3681/An_emerging_middle_class.html

[6] Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index, p. 7. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/

[7] Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report, p. 38. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report

[8] Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index, p.7. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/

[9] The GEI measures both the quality of entrepreneurship and the extent and depth of the supporting entrepreneurial ecosystem through 14 important for the health of entrepreneurial ecosystems,

[10] Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2018). Global Entrepreneurship Index, p. 5. Retrieved December 22, 2017, from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/

[11] Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2014). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Australia Profile. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.gemconsortium.org/country-profile/37; Mair. (2017, May 19). Startup failure rate up by 42% in Australia. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.ibtimes.com.au/startup-failure-rate-42-australia-1553531; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report

[12] Has not participated in the Global Entrepreneurship Index or the GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2014). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in New Zealand Profile. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/137

[13] World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, p. 182 from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018

[14] Chinese University of Hong Kong. (n.d.). Joint Entrepreneurship Study Shows Staggering Increase in Hong Kong and Shenzhen Entrepreneurial Activities Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://goo.gl/hdf2mb; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Hong Kong. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/135; Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/; SMBWorld Asia. (2017). Entrepreneurship in Hong Kong and Shenzhen on the rise: study. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://www.enterpriseinnovation.net/article/entrepreneurship-hong-kong-and-shenzhen-rise-study-1644884364; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; Post, T. J. (n.d.). Ministry targets entrepreneurship rate to hit 4% this year. Retrieved December 24, 2017, from http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2017/03/22/ministry-targets-entrepreneurship-rate-to-hit-4-this-year.html

[15] Nawangpalupi, C. B., Pawitan, G., Gunawan, A., Widyarini, M., Putri, F. E., & Iskandarsjah, T. (n.d.). GEM Entrepreneurship In Indonesia: Conditions And Opportunities For Growth And Sustainability 2015/2016 Indonesia Report. Bandung: Parahyangan Catholic University UNPAR Press. Retrieved from http://www.gemconsortium.org/report/49792; PricewaterhouseCoopers. (n.d.). The World in 2050, p. 7. Retrieved from https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/issues/economy/the-world-in-2050.html; Indonesia Investments. (n.d.). Difficult for Indonesia to Become an Innovation-Driven Economy. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from https://www.indonesia-investments.com/news/news-columns/difficult-for-indonesia-to-become-an-innovation-driven-economy/item7920?; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Indonesia. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/70

[16] Nor, N. A. A. M. (2015). Entrepreneurship Development Policy in Malaysia. FFTC Agricultural Policy Platform (FTTC-AP). Retrieved from http://ap.fftc.agnet.org/ap_db.php?id=439; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Malaysia. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/86; Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/

[17] Regnstrom, A. (2017). Making the Philippines an archipelago for entrepreneurs. The Manila Times Online. Retrieved from http://www.manilatimes.net/making-philippines-archipelago-entrepreneurs/366187/;  Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015/16. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2015). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in the Philippines. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/98; Velasco, A. L., Castillo, P., Conchada, M. I., Gozun, B., Largoza, G., Perez, J., & Sarreal, E. (n.d.). Philippine Entrepreneurship Report 2015–2016. Manila, Philippines: De La Salle University. Retrieved from http://www.gemconsortium.org/country-profile/98; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018; Limsamarnphun, N. (2017). Thailand has what is needed for entrepreneurs. Retrieved December 24, 2017, from http://www.nationmultimedia.com/detail/Corporate/30310947; Paulson, A. L., & Townsend, R. (2004). Entrepreneurship and financial constraints in Thailand. Journal of Corporate Finance, 10, 229–262. Retrieved from http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0929119903000567.

[18] Koning, Juliette & Michiel Verver. Historicizing the ‘ethnic’ in ethnic entrepreneurship: The case of the ethnic Chinese in Bangkok. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 25(5/6) (2013), 325–48; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Thailand. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/114; Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018

[19] Wang, X. (2017). Entrepreneurship in China: strong or dispirited? Retrieved December 24, 2017, from http://www.scmp.com/week-asia/opinion/article/2113446/entrepreneurship-china-strong-or-dispirited; Wee, S.-L. (2017, October 23). China’s Entrepreneurs Squirm Under Xi Jinping’s Tightening Grip. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/23/world/asia/china-xi-business-entrepreneurs.html; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; Economist. (2017, September 23). China’s audacious and inventive new generation of entrepreneurs. The Economist. Retrieved from https://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21729429-industries-and-consumers-around-world-will-soon-feel-their-impact-chinas-audacious-and; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in China. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/51; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015/16. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; Kharas, H. (2017, February 28). The unprecedented expansion of the global middle class. Retrieved from https://www.brookings.edu/research/the-unprecedented-expansion-of-the-global-middle-class-2/; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018

[20] PTI. (2017). 83% of Indian workforce prefers to be entrepreneurs: Survey – Times of India. Retrieved December 24, 2017, from http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/business/india-business/83-of-indian-workforce-prefers-to-be-entrepreneurs-survey/articleshow/59987493.cms; SPJIMR. (2017). Entrepreneurship in India – Then and now. Retrieved December 24, 2017, from http://www.forbesindia.com/article/spjimr/entrepreneurship-in-india-then-and-now/46701/1; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in India. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/69; Ghani, E. (2017, December 13). Promoting entrepreneurship in India. Retrieved December 24, 2017, from https://goo.gl/gLpMuo; Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015/16. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018

[21] Solomon, R. (2017, June 18). Kick-starting entrepreneurship in Japan. Retrieved from http://beaconreports.net/en/kick-starting-entrepreneurship-japan/; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Japan. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/76; Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/; Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015/16. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018; ;

[22] Crucianu, P.-A. R. (2017). Entrepreneurship and Innovation in South Korea. Bari: RCIC’17 Redefining Community in Intercultural Context. Retrieved from https://goo.gl/EqDaAr; Diplomat, E. C., The. (n.d.). What ‘Entrepreneurship’ Means to South Koreans. Retrieved December 24, 2017, from https://thediplomat.com/2016/01/what-entrepreneurship-means-to-south-koreans/; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Korea. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/125; Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015/16. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; Lee, S. M., Chang, D., & Lim, S. (2005). Impact of Entrepreneurship Education: A Comparative Study of the U.S. and Korea. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1, 27–43.; Ramirez, E. (n.d.). Why Entrepreneurs Come To South Korea – And Why They Don’t. Retrieved December 24, 2017, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/elaineramirez/2017/05/25/why-entrepreneurs-come-to-south-korea-and-why-they-dont/; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018

[23] Chernyshenko, O., Uy, M., Jiang, W., Ho, M., Lee, S. P., Chan, K. Y., & Yu, T. K. Y. (2015). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2014 Singapore Report. Singapore: Nanyang Technological University. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/105; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Singapore. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/105; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015/16. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018

[24] Neo, M. (2017). Taiwan ranked 18th for Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved December 25, 2017, from https://www.taiwannews.com.tw/en/news/3309600; Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO. (2017). Global Innovation Index 2017 Report. Retrieved from https://www.globalinnovationindex.org/gii-2017-report; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Taiwan. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/113; Global Entrepreneurship Development Institute. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Index. Retrieved from https://thegedi.org/global-entrepreneurship-and-development-index/; Herrington, M., & Kew, P. (2017). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2016/17. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; Kelley, D. J., Singer, S., & Herrington, M. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2015/16. Global Entrepreneurship Research Association. Retrieved from http://gemconsortium.org/report; World Bank Group. (2017). Doing Business 2018 – Reforming to Create Jobs. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://www.doingbusiness.org/reports/global-reports/doing-business-2018; Xinhua. (2017). Entrepreneurship popular among low-salaried Taiwanese youth: survey. Retrieved December 25, 2017, from http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2017-11/30/c_136791090.htm

[25] Loc, V. T. (2016). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor Vietnam 2015/16  Special Theme: Social Entrepreneurship. Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry; GEM Global Entrepreneurship Monitor. (2016). Entrepreneurial Behaviour and Attitudes in Vietnam. Retrieved December 23, 2017, from http://gemconsortium.org/country-profile/119; Vietnam Business Forum. (n.d.). Consistent Solutions for Better Business Environment in 2017 in Vietnam. Retrieved December 25, 2017, from http://vccinews.com/news_detail.asp?news_id=34352; Vietnam Government Portal. (n.d.). Resolution improves business climate and competitiveness in 2017. Retrieved December 25, 2017, from http://news.chinhphu.vn/Home/Resolution-improves-business-climate-and-competitiveness-in-2017/20172/29752.vgp

Howard Frederick

Leading world expert in Entrepreneurship Education
Have coached 1000s | Design Thinking trainer
Greater Boston Area

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *