Research Article: 2022 Vol: 25 Issue: 3S
Growth Predictors of Rural Entrepreneurship in North-East India
Rajesh Chatterjee, Centre for Studies in Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy, Tripura University, India
Debarshi Mukherjee, Department of Business Management, Tripura University, India
Amit Kr. Deb, Centre for Studies in Social Exclusion and Inclusive Policy, Tripura University, India
Citation Information: Chatterjee, R., Mukherjee, D., & Deb, A.K. (2022). Growth predictors of rural entrepreneurship in North-East India. Journal of Entrepreneurship Education, 25(S3), 1-16.
Abstract
The economic development of any area depends upon its entrepreneurial activities, based on socio-cultural support, skill, and motivational factors. A comprehensive effort has been necessitated to consider the influence of these factors on enterprises. Tripura is a small border state of North-East India has not seen major industrial growth, even though trying to promote entrepreneurship within the state for since long. Only financial target-oriented superfluous schemes of government cannot save entrepreneurship, if motivation and skill factor which was concealed since the inception of five-year planning, are barred from apt attention and due diligence. This paper investigates the entrepreneurial predictors, which are having a significant impact on entrepreneurial growth. The study proves that a total entrepreneurship program covering motivational aspects and skill factors may usher a new era in the state and country as well covering the entrepreneurs of the state, and revealing motivation work as the single biggest contributor for entrepreneurial growth in Tripura, whereas other factors of socio-cultural support and skill factors have limited impact.
Keywords
Entrepreneurship, Motivation, Skill, Socio-Cultural.
List of Abbreviations
DIC: District Industry Centre DV: Dependent Variable GDP: Gross Domestic Product GEM: Global Entrepreneurship Monitor GoI: Government of India, HDI: Human Development Index IGDC: Indo-German Development Corporation IV: Independent Variable JICA: Japan International Cooperation Agency KVIB: Khadi and Village Industry Board KVIC: Khadi and Village Industry Corporation MSME: Micro, Small & Medium Enterprise NABARD: National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development NEDFI: North Eastern Development Financial Institution NERLP: North Eastern Rural Livelihood Project NGO: Non-Government Organization NSSO: National Sample Survey Organization PMRY: Prime Minister RozgarYojna RUDSETI: Rural Development Self Employment Training Institute SHG: Self Help Groups SOFED: Society for Entrepreneurship Development TBM: Tripura Bamboo Mission TRLM: Tripura Rural Livelihood Mission
Introduction
Entrepreneurship is being considered as one of the most effective and successful tools for poverty alleviation through job creation (Grilo & Thurik, 2005). Entrepreneurship accelerates social and economic development (Feldman et al., 2016) of the poor, and is treated as a driving force to empower the masses both socially and economically. Poverty is a universal phenomenon subsisting almost in all countries. Multiple initiatives and strategies since 1951 have been adopted in India to alleviate poverty through different five-year plans (Planning Commission of India, Five Year Plan, GoI, 1951-2017). After engaging in entrepreneurial activities, poor people gradually start earning and live a healthy life; hence entrepreneurship is the key factor for sustainable economic growth (Audretsch & Thurik, 2001; Audretsch et al., 2006; Griffee, 2019). This is a new economic endeavour for self-employment (Carsrud & Johnson, 1989; Thornton, 1999; Collins et al., 1964; McClelland, 1961; Dibrell et al., 2011) but it has also social phenomenon (Berger, 1995; Shapero & Sokol, 1982; Steyaert, 2007; Chatterjee et al., 2017).
Yunus & Jolis in their famous book ‘Banker to the poor’ had introduced a notion that all human being have the same potential to become an entrepreneur, and their success depends on ‘urge and intention’. Notably, he often described the poor as ‘natural entrepreneurs’. In this regard, Schumpeter’s (1934) five famous manifestations of entrepreneur needs to be recollected; they include the introduction of a new or improved good, introduction of a new method of production, opening of a new market, exploitation of a new source of supply, and creation of new organization or industry. Suffice to say that an entrepreneur him/herself is the key person to initiate an entrepreneurship activity.
The micro, small and medium enterprises (MSME) are strong sectors of the Indian economy, providing large employment opportunities with lower investments. Notably, eighty million people are employed in this sector under 36 million units and producing about 6000 products. This sector is treated as one of the most vibrant sectors of the nation, as it contributes 8% to the national GDP, which translates to about 45% of the total manufacturing production, and contributes about 40% to the Indian export sector (MSME, 2018; Sharma, 2016; NSSO 73rd Round, 2017). These enterprises are spread across both rural and urban areas. The rural economy is based on the villages, which are largely dependent on agriculture and rural entrepreneurship-based activities. Rural entrepreneurship may be classified among (i) individual, (ii) group, (iii) cluster, and (iv) cooperative entrepreneurship.
Major Factors of Rural Entrepreneurship
The success or failure of any rural entrepreneurship generally depends on the general environment (i.e. economy, technology, foreign countries, politics, and social factors); immediate environment (i.e. customers, suppliers, competitors, banks, and credit institutions); entrepreneur characteristics (i.e. motivation, qualities, skills, and personal characteristics); entrepreneur’s socio-economic status (i.e. age, educational level, marital status, past business experience, previous employment, experience in current business operation). All of this in amalgamation affect economic empowerment, and in turn impacts rural entrepreneurship (Tubey, 2013). Besides, government agencies play a crucial role to support entrepreneurship, mainly in terms of access to finance, access to market, access to infrastructure, and social service, along with access to technology; these factors influence entrepreneurship in India (Shah, 2013; Van Der Heijden, 2000).
Literature Review
The meaning of entrepreneurship is to do something (Hoselitz, 1952); an entrepreneur is the person who takes the risk of the future uncertain situation, introduces something new in the business. He is a leader, an innovator (Schumpeter, 1934); organizer, manager, coordinator (Arasti, 2011), and a supplier of capital in business.
The key success of rural entrepreneurship of the underprivileged sections wrests with factors like skill-quotient, innovation, motivation, risk-taking capability (Banerjee & Duflo, 2011; Banerjee, 2017), financial support, education, technology, infrastructure, firm size, and contributions from the stakeholders (Dutta, 2009). In India, the stratified social structures work as a major impediment to entrepreneurship development (Kshetri, 2011). Lesser value is accorded to innovation and improvements in India (Joo, 2011; Wilson & Gallup, 1955)
Berna (1959) conducted a study to find the problems of industrialists in Chennai (erstwhile Madras, an Indian metro city in the state of Tamil Nadu). The study revealed that most of the entrepreneurship ventures were run by men; these entrepreneurs were engineering graduates of diverse socio-cultural backgrounds that included Brahmins, Naidus, Chettiars, Naik, Gujrati & Ansari. Additionally, most of them belonged to the upper-middle-class. The types of entrepreneurship ventures they were into included rice-hullers, roughcasting machines, miscellaneous textile and agricultural machinery, electric motors, and motor-driven pumps. Nandy (1973) conducted a study in the Howrah district of the Indian state of West Bengal. The study revealed that most of the entrepreneurs belonged to the Mahisya caste (Bengali caste group). This particular caste group had its roots from traditional low social status, uneducated, and agriculturist caste. North & Thomas (1973) studied 100 rural entrepreneurs of Anand Taluka, a prosperous Indian state of Gujarat. The study revealed that most of the entrepreneurs sampled were below 40 years of age, were literate, had a dynamic quality, and initiated their business by themselves. Dak in search of the mobility of human resources and labour conducted a study using 200 rural small-scale entrepreneurs of Haryana. The findings showed that hereditary occupation dominated the rural industry, which in turn resulted in poor growth of rural industries in the state. Kanitkar (1994) conducted a case study among 86 village entrepreneurs in India. He examined the entrepreneur's economic profile, motivation for shifting enterprises of agricultural activity to non-firm or non-agricultural sectors. Further, he also looked for factors involved in entrepreneurship. His analysis showed that a large number of entrepreneurs ran their businesses without proper training, education, and skill. He remarked that these factors were responsible for the entrepreneurs to change their entrepreneurial activity from the farm sector to the non-farm sector. Later, Sinha (2004) conducted another empirical study in Tripura with Prime Minister Rozgar Yojna (PMRY) scheme beneficiaries of 1993-1996 (Financial year). This study extracted a few factors that are very important in entrepreneurship development, including the motivation of the prospective candidates, where the importance of marketing, finance, modern machinery is absent in the PMRY scheme. The National Knowledge Commission of India (2008) argued that limited growth of entrepreneurship is contributed by lack of awareness and training, corruption, complex registration and licensing system, lack of skilled labour, complicated credit system, and poor infrastructure.
Arasti (2011) conducted a pragmatic study in Iran to identify the main causes of business failures. The study analysed data using descriptive statistics, and the results revealed- lack of good management, non-support from banks and financial institutions, inadequate economic sphere, and insufficient governmental policies, which are the main factors of business failures in Iran. Vyakarnam & Fiafor conducted a study with rural entrepreneurs of Ghana. The study revealed that rural entrepreneurship is affected by cultural issues; rural entrepreneurs found themselves being self-dependent as compared to urban entrepreneurs. The study concluded with the remarks that most of the entrepreneurs' training focused only on the economic aspects, while the social aspects of entrepreneurs were less highlighted. Afrin et al. (2008) conducted a study to identify factors related to the development of entrepreneurship among rural women borrowers through micro-credit programs in Bangladesh. The results indicated a significant relationship between financial management skill and group identity of women borrowers for developing rural women entrepreneurship in Bangladesh.
It is apparent from extant literature that most of the studies have covered demographic, social, cultural, motivational and problem aspects in the entrepreneurship domain. This affirms that various factors are responsible for growing entrepreneurship. Each of the factors is correlated with the growth and development of any business. However, there seems to be no comprehensive literature, which has possibly encompassed all the identified factors together. Hence, this study aims to find the relationship and the status of entrepreneurship growth with demographic characteristics, socio-cultural environment, and government support for rural entrepreneurship promotion, motivation for engagement in entrepreneurship, skill and problem factors of rural entrepreneurship. This study does have a great scope and social impact on the prospects of rural entrepreneurship in Tripura.
Identification of Research Variables
From various studies, multiple factors have been noted (Olowa & Olowa, 2015) for being responsible for the growth of entrepreneurship. Hence, entrepreneurship growth is dependent on various independent factors and sub-factors. To construct the interview schedule, one dependent variable i.e. entrepreneurship growth, and four independent (i.e. motivation, socio-cultural factor, the role of government agencies, skill) variables have been considered. Further, these sub-factors are cross-checked with the help of a literature review (references mentioned in the parenthesis) (Table 1).
| Table 1 Research Variables | |
| Research Variable with description | Relevant Literature |
| Entrepreneurship growth (Dependent Variable):- Increase in Income, more revenue generation, increase in valued assets, developed infrastructure, job creation, add new business with the existing business, increased production, add new technology for more production. |
Shah (2013); Momani (2017); Schumpeter (1934) |
| Motivation (Independent Variable 1):- Unemployment & to earn moneyfor government support, family business, innovationto live a better life, motivated by other successful entrepreneurs (Imitation), personal satisfaction (Self-sufficiency). |
Molina (2020); Mishra (1987); Nath (2000); Schumpeter (1934); Shah (2013); Khanka (2006); McDowell (1994) |
| Socio-cultural factors (Independent Variable 2):- Community Support, entrepreneur’s family business, family member support for rural entrepreneurial work; entrepreneurship education has an impact on entrepreneurship, health is affected by entrepreneurship, religion has an impact on rural entrepreneurship, utilization of local resources. |
Huggins & Thompson (2014); Kanitkar (1994); Singh & Saxena (2000); Srivastava (2005); Joo (2011) |
| Skill (Independent Variable 3):- Enhancement of managerial power (Leadership quality), assume the risk of business, improved technical skill (Computer/ Internet/Machinery), strong social network (Good customer relations), and improved marketing capacity. |
Hoselitz (1952); OECD (2014); Gupta et al. (2013) |
| Role of government agencies(Independent Variable 4):- Regular awareness on various schemes, provides financial assistance, conduct a need-based training program, providemachinery/raw materials, provide marketing facilities, provide business license/registration. |
Pereira (2007); National Knowledge Commission Report (2008); Rajagopal, 1999; Gupta et al. (2013); Oza (1988) |
Methodology
Research Design
The study begins with a Focus Group Discussion (FGD) to identify the determining variables contributing to the growth of entrepreneurship in Tripura. The participants included a group of entrepreneurs managing small and medium enterprises (SMEs). Four focus groups were created to facilitate discussion, whereby each group had about 20 entrepreneurs, split under four districts i.e. Manu, Dhalai, West Tripura, Sabroom. The researchers explained the purpose of the discussion to the participants, and they in turn were motivated to share their opinions. The review after the discussion revealed that the outcome of the FGD did corroborate with the literature review. The major factors that were identified included motivation, the role of government, socio-cultural issues, and skill factors having an influence over entrepreneurship growth in the state.
A pilot study was conducted to establish the accuracy of the instrument after evaluating the reliability (Cronbach's Alpha=0.936) and validity (inter-item correlation is between 0.3 and 0.9). The research design indicated a causal relationship among the variables, which necessitates the application of multiple linear regressions to measure the influence of independent variables (Motivation, Socio-Cultural, Role of Government, and Skill Factors) on the dependent variable (Entrepreneurship Growth). Further, automatic linear modelling was used to obtain the most significant independent variable along with the revised regression equation.
The existing literature of the entrepreneurship domain suggests that demographical, environmental, economic, psychological, social, and cultural factors are responsible for the growth of entrepreneurship. This study has looked for the effect of those factors, which are responsible for entrepreneurship growth in Tripura, and based on this idea, the following objectives have been set (Figure 1).
Figure 1 Research Model
1. To explore the contribution of government agencies in encouraging rural entrepreneurship in Tripura.
2. To identify the factors influencing the growth of rural entrepreneurship in the state and
3. To suggest comprehensive measures for the growth of rural entrepreneurship in Tripura.
Research Model
Hypotheses Development
Based on the research model described above, four hypotheses are constructed. On the left side of the model, the independent variables are mentioned; these are measured by dependent variables, which are on the right side of this model. Based on literature review and research problem hypothesis are constructed as follows:
H1: There is a significant positive relationship between Growth and motivational factors of Entrepreneurship.
H2: There is a significant positive relationship between Growth and the Socio-cultural factors of Entrepreneurship.
H3: There is a significant positive relationship between Growth and government support factors of Entrepreneurship.
H4: There is a significant positive relationship between Growth and the skill factors of entrepreneurship.
Study Area
As per the administrative set up by the government, there are eight districts in Tripura, named North, Unakoti, Dhalai, Khowai, West, Shipahijala, Gomati, and South Tripura districts. This study has been conducted with entrepreneurship in rural areas of Dhalai, and the West district of the state of Tripura. These two districts were selected for this study, based on the Human Development Index (HDI) report, 2007, considering Tripura Human Development Index (HDI), the Government of Tripura (2007), reveals HDI of West district is 0.61 which is the highest. Secondly, the HDI of the Dhalai district is 0.51, which is the lowest compared to other districts on previous administrative set up in Tripura (Government of Tripura, 2007).
The Universe of the Sample
Only registered entrepreneurs have been considered under the universe of the sample. As per the data extracted from the government department, the total numbers of registered entrepreneurs within the state are 76460 (Source: RUDSETI, Agartala, JICA, Agartala, IGDC, Agartala, The Economic Review of Tripura, 2015-16)
Sampling Design
In this research, rural area-based entrepreneurship has been randomly selected. Information of available entrepreneurs is collected from the local village people of West and Dhalai district. The sample size is determined based on the total universe of population. Here, in this study, the sample size has been determined based on the mathematical calculation of Trao Yamane.
Where ‘N’ is the total population i.e.76460 entrepreneurs, ‘e' is the error at confidence level 95 percent or error (e) is 0.05. Therefore, the sample size ‘n' is 395.48 or considered 400. The sample size herein is 400 rural entrepreneurs of Tripura (200 rural entrepreneurs of Dhalai and 200 rural entrepreneurs of West Tripura district).
Data Collection & Analysis
The primary data has been collected by a structured interview, based on extant literature, followed by a pilot survey. The interview schedule has been set up in the 7-point Likert scale. The answers to the responses are determined as strongly disagree, disagree, disagree somewhat, undecided, agree somewhat, agree, strongly agree. The responses are coded as strongly disagree=1, disagree=2, disagree somewhat=3, undecided=4, agree somewhat=5, agree=6, strongly agree=7.
The procedures of collected data are as follows:-
• To analyze the first objective descriptive statistics is used.
• To analyze the second objective, the multiple regression method was applied.
Results
Contribution of Government Agencies in Encouraging Rural Entrepreneurship in Tripura
In Tripura, there are four departments involved in the promotion of rural entrepreneurship viz., Department of Industry and Commerce, Department of Handloom, Handicrafts, and Sericulture, Department of Rural Development, District Industry Centre (DIC), Khadi and Village Industry Corporation (KVIC), Khadi and Village Industry Board (KVIB), Rural Development Department, Department of Forest. These departments cover various rural entrepreneurship promotion schemes and programs.
Training institutes like Rural Development & Self Employment Training Institute (RUDSETI), Society for Entrepreneurship Development (SOFED) impart training to the entrepreneurs for skill development regularly. Few projects/missions like North Eastern Rural Livelihood Project (NERLP), Tripura Rural Livelihood Mission (TRLM), Indo-German Development Corporation (IGDC), JICA Project, and Tripura Bamboo Mission (TBM) promote rural entrepreneurship in the state. Financial institutions like North Eastern Development Financial Institution (NEDFI), National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development (NABARD), and other nationalized banks also support rural entrepreneurs of Tripura by providing financial support.
The study finds that most of the rural entrepreneurs of these two districts disagreed with all the indicators of government support. Rural entrepreneurs' responses exhibit that there is no regular awareness drive from the government on the various schemes that are meant to support the village industry. Similarly, they also disagreed about financial support from the government. They reiterated that they never got any financial assistance from the government, nor government agencies conducted any need-based training. Besides, nomachinery/raw materials, marketing facilities have been provided to the entrepreneurs; importantly, non-cooperation from the office staff has been widely reported for issuing business licenses or registration.
Factors Influencing the Growth of Rural Entrepreneurship in the State
As per the proposed research model, the factor of Entrepreneurship Growth is largely influenced by four dimensions, measured by thirty-four items, whereas the dependent variable is measured by thirteen items. Hence the following regression is developed (Table 2).
| Table 2 Model Summaryb | ||||||||||
| Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate | Change Statistics | Durbin-Watson | ||||
| R Square Change | F Change | df1 | df2 | Sig. F Change | ||||||
| 1 | 0.865a | 0.748 | 0.745 | 0.09771 | 0.748 | 292.419 | 4 | 395 | 0 | 1.619 |
| a. Predictors: (Constant), Skill_Factor, Role_of_Govt_Agency, Motivation, Socio_Cultural_Factor b. Dependent Variable: Entrepreneurship_Growth |
||||||||||
The value of adjusted R2 is 74% of the variability in the dependent variable by the proposed model. However, the model remains still significant (p<0.05). The Cronbach's alpha value of 0.912 ensures the reliability of the instrument and the effectiveness of the study. The result also shows that independent variables have a significant and positive relationship with the dependent variable (Table 3).
| Table 3 Coefficientsa | |||||||
| Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | Collinearity Statistics | ||
| B | Std. Error | Beta | VIF | ||||
| 1 | (Constant) | 0.091 | 0.044 | 2.060 | 0.040 | ||
| Motivation | 0.371 | 0.050 | 0.376 | 7.466 | 0.000 | 3.151 | |
| Socio Cultural | 0.243 | 0.064 | 0.243 | 3.774 | 0.000 | 5.136 | |
| Role of Govt | 0.146 | 0.032 | 0.160 | 4.572 | 0.000 | 1.524 | |
| Skill Factors | 0.143 | 0.047 | 0.157 | 3.056 | 0.002 | 3.284 | |
The above table helps in formulating the regression equation (Table 4)
| Table 4 Anovaa | ||||||
| Model | Sum of Squares | df | Mean Square | F | Sig. | |
| 1 | Regression | 55.335 | 4 | 13.834 | 211.22 | 0.000b |
| Residual | 25.870 | 395 | 0.065 | |||
| Total | 81.204 | 399 | ||||
DV=0.091+0.376 IV1+0.243 IV2+0.160 IV3+0.157 IV4
Hypotheses Establishment
Based on the proposed research model the hypotheses formulated are tested, and the findings are presented below. The F-test assumes that the null hypothesis, as posited in the model explains zero variance in the dependent variable. It is observed that the F-test is highly significant, and the variance in the dependent variable is significant. The F value of 211.22 with p<0.05; therefore, F4,395=211.22. Since the test statistic is higher than the critical value, the null hypothesis is rejected and inferred that the difference among the population means is significant. The p-value for 211.22 is 2.39; therefore it may be assumed that the test statistic is significant at that level. The overall model is significant, since ANOVA is significant at p<0.05, adjusted R2 is 0.745; the model can explain the influence of independent variables to the tune of over 50% on entrepreneurship growth. From the Co-efficient table, it becomes evident that among the four independent variables, three are significant i.e. Motivation, Role of Government, Skill Factors. The remaining one variable i.e. Socio-Cultural Issues seems to have a high Variance Inflation Factor (VIF>4), indicating thereby that the variable is inflated by a factor of 5.136, because it is highly correlated with one of the predictors of the model, and is thereby removed from the final equation (Table 5 & 6).
| Table 5 Revised Model Summary | ||||||||
| Model | R | R Square | Adjusted R Square | Std. Error of the Estimate | Change Statistics | Durbin-Watson | ||
| df1 | df2 | Sig. F Change | ||||||
| 1 | 0.818a | 0.67 | 0.667 | 0.26016 | 3 | 396 | 0 | 1.791 |
| a. Dependent Variable: Entrepreneurship Growth; b. Predictors: (Constant), Skill Factors, Role of Government, Motivation, Socio-Cultural |
||||||||
| Table 6 Coefficients | |||||||
| Model | Unstandardized Coefficients | Standardized Coefficients | t | Sig. | Collinearity Statistics | ||
| B | Std. Error | Beta | VIF | ||||
| 1 | (Constant) | 0.138 | 0.043 | 3.204 | 0.001 | ||
| Motivation | 0.48 | 0.041 | 0.487 | 11.663 | 0 | 2.09 | |
| Role of Govt | 0.167 | 0.032 | 0.184 | 5.242 | 0 | 1.476 | |
| Skill Factors | 0.243 | 0.039 | 0.267 | 6.201 | 0 | 2.23 | |
H1: Motivation to do business has a significant and positive relationship with entrepreneurship growth in Tripura. Hence, H1 is tested to be accepted.
H2: Socio-Cultural issues do not have a positive relationship with entrepreneurship growth in Tripura due to a high correlation with any other predictor. Hence, H2 is tested to be rejected.
H3: Govt. support is an important factor that has a positive and significant impact on entrepreneurship growth. Hence, H3 is tested to be accepted.
H4: Skill factors have a significant and positive impact on entrepreneurship growth. Hence, H4 is tested to be accepted.
Therefore the final regression equation is formulated as
The final regression equation is derived as:-
Entrepreneurship Growth=0.138+0.487 Motivation+0.184 Role of Government+0.267 Skill Factors
The P-P plot shows that the residuals are normally distributed without any major deviations
From the analysis above, it is evident that three independent variables viz., Motivation, Role of Government, and Skill Factors are significant contributors to determine the entrepreneurship growth environment in Tripura. Using forward stepwise regression available in automatic linear modeling, one could infer that the respondents have identified ‘Motivation’ as the most important predictor (Predictor Importance 0.67 p<0.05, Figure 2), whereas the remaining two variables have relatively lesser importance. Though from Figure 3, it is discernible that Skill factors (0.19) and Government Support (0.14) also contribute to ensuring the growth of entrepreneurship; however, the impact is certainly not highly contributory.
Figure 2 Normal P-P Plot
Figure 3 Final Model with Predictor Importance
The factors like Motivation, Socio-Cultural issues, Govt. support and Skill were taken into consideration for this study and after testing the hypothesis scientifically through statistical formula, it is established that the second hypothesis (H2) i.e. socio-cultural factor has no influence on the entrepreneurial growth. Review of literature connotes that community Support, entrepreneur’s family business, family member support for rural entrepreneurial work; entrepreneurship education has an impact on entrepreneurship where religion has an impact on rural entrepreneurship for utilization of local resources (Huggins & Thompson, 2014; Kanitkar, 1994; Singh & Saxena, 2000; Srivastava, 2005; Joo, 2011). These all are considered here as socio-cultural factors. The possibility of their occurrence cannot be statistically determined (Knight, 1957). It is not imperative to draw a relation with each and every factor which initially taken in the model.
So, the skeleton of the final model depicted from the Figure 3 based on the framework developed for this empirical study exhibited below and it may be considered as new model of which is redeveloped (Figure 4).
Figure 4 Growth of Entrepreneurship
Discussion
Motivation
Entrepreneurs with a high need for achievement have an intense desire for achievement and an equally intense fear of failure. They want to be challenged, set moderately difficult goals for themselves, take a practical approach to risk, and favor to assume personal responsibility to set a job done, like specific and proper feedback on how they're doing the activities supported inherent skill or being skilled, tend to be restless, and don't worry unduly about failure if it does occur. Their high level of motivation goes on skill, and socio-cultural condition.
The socio-economically backward people of Tripura had started or engaged themselves in entrepreneurship to earn their livelihood. Thus, they had been mitigating family needs, increasing regular income, developing infrastructure, and generating assets. Being motivated positively by their joblessness, innovative idea, the concept of living a better life, following other successful entrepreneurs and all personal satisfactory work, the entrepreneurs have been engaged in business activity. This motivation is being used as a tool emerging from within to become self-reliant. Besides, support from local community people, family members, and helping hands, good business awareness, good health, prompt and precise decision-making ability, and religious festivals (especially to show-and-tell) have a strong positive influence on entrepreneurship growth.
Government Support
On the other hand, the state and the central government are squarely trying to promote rural entrepreneurship through multiple schemes to improve entrepreneurship and entrepreneurial research in India. Various government/ departmental data reveal that a large number of enterprises are registered, and a huge amount of money has been spent on implementing multiple promotional schemes of the Govt. of India through the Department of Industry and Commerce, Rural Development Department, Forest Department, and District Industrial Centre. However, in reality, no significant development has been traced about the status of the entrepreneurs and their entrepreneurship ventures, indicating thereby a bleak and discouraging scenario of entrepreneurship in Tripura. Studying secondary data as recorded in these departments, and analyzing primary data, it is clear that government agencies successfully form self-help groups (SHGs) and federations. However, most stakeholders seem to engage themselves with these schemes simply to get financial benefits like to enjoy the subsidy of the loan, not to redeem the loan amount and to get the revolving fund which is an interest free loan for the SHG-entrepreneurs and it has to be refunded but indeed they don’t refund. They do all the needful to get this financial support from these schemes. Only a few of them form part of the exception, and are start-up entrepreneurs; most follow other's businesses, imitate or represent their business activity till such period when financial doles are available, and finally become non-functional. On the contrary, stakeholders' negative view, the seemingly non-supportive role of government agencies for entrepreneurship promotion, puts a question mark on the reality of government support for entrepreneurship development. Further, entrepreneurs' motive behind taking financial benefit than doing concrete business is also full of doubt. Until and unless this obscure course is changed, the fruitful result has to fall below the benchmark despite the initiation of multiple schemes or programs for this geographically isolated state. To implement entrepreneurship development schemes in Tripura, the role played by government agencies is very negligible because government agencies are neither imparting need-based training nor generating mass awareness on the entrepreneurship development program. Therefore, the purpose of government agencies has less influence on entrepreneurship growth.
Skill
Entrepreneurs’ skills like managerial aptitude, high risk-taking intent, business networking capacity, good customer relationship appetite, and effective marketing quality have a high positive influence on the growth of entrepreneurship. Besides, even though entrepreneurs face numerous problems during their entrepreneurial activities, they are capable to tackle all obstacles through their positive motivation. Thus, multiple factors such as the socio-economic background of the entrepreneur, motivation, socio-cultural environment, financial and technical support from government agencies, and the entrepreneur's interpersonal skills are needed for the growth and development of rural entrepreneurship. No single factor can affect entrepreneurial growth; whereas, all factors combined have much more effective control over the growth of rural entrepreneurship.
Mindset enrichment in furthering creative and innovative work could be plasticized since childhood that, in turn, helps a person to be a perfect employer; and its role in societal development is thus myriad. Ample scope of work pushes forcefully a person to strive more; and competition, inter alia, causes a man to be precision tailored. It is evident from past studies that hardworking people like women are always task-oriented. Demographic data of this research shows that more women (52.2%) are associated with entrepreneurship; but their skill deficiency, steadfast resolve, and willingness to continue a task against any difficulties are pushing them into a vicious circle of poverty. The male entrepreneurs admitted that their low quality of production cause impediments in capturing the national and international market. Further, the study confirms that compromising with skill leads to increased unproductive labor in the unorganized sector, and therefore the government’s flagship programs like MGNREGA are more eye-catching to the rural people. The government program should always work as a facilitator and service provider. Government or local self-government should make out the list of clients and invariably not of beneficiaries. Professional approach in each initiative of government from making a list of clients' to providing viable training could only bring consistency vis-à-vis purposeful sustenance in the entrepreneurship growth as well as economic growth.
Further, the result of this study shows that there is a plausible relation between entrepreneurship growth and motivation; nevertheless, skill and government support are compelling them to be in a spot. The regression result also reveals that the model developed through this study is quite significant.
1. Out of four dimensions, motivation level has a high correlation with entrepreneurship growth indicating inter-alia the fact that motivation is indeed the prime factor in each government project intending to promote rural entrepreneurship.
2. All three dimensions have an incontrovertible influence over entrepreneurship growth. The skill factor is in a guiding position and has a commanding influence over entrepreneurship growth. Therefore, one needs to emphasize skill development programs for extracting the best results from these entrepreneurs.
3. Government support seems to have hardly any influence on entrepreneurship growth; be it the subsidized loan, a supply of low-cost raw material, free training, loan from a bank and political support or interference, etc. which in turn tend to make people more distressed, hopeless and aimless causing to be born as a crutch holder.
Any activity related to entrepreneurship has to be more specific on motivational and skill aspects, where government support works hand-in-hand and acts as an impetus for achievement. For instance, nearly 48% of the sampled entrepreneurs are not registered with any government programs due to negligence and non-cooperation from government officials like the absence of awareness programs, lengthy loan disbursing methods, and gratuitous training. It could have been better if motivational and skill development initiatives were implemented properly and justifiably by the government to create such an environment in the country that leaves ample scope of job opportunities inter-alia, boosting an effect upon entrepreneurship as well as economic growth. India has been facing an acute unemployment problem since her independence, and this tiny North Eastern state like Tripura also embraces high unemployment growth (MLE, 2015-19). The study proves that a total entrepreneurship program covering motivational aspects and skill factors may usher a new era in the state and country as well. Economic growth would have been steady if small and marginal entrepreneurs could stay in morally excellent conditions. Only financial target-oriented superfluous schemes of government cannot save these people, if motivation and skill factor which was concealed since the inception of five-year planning, are barred from apt attention and due diligence.
Conclusion
To reiterate, Tripura is a geographically isolated, landlocked hilly state of North-Eastern India and being surrounded by Bangladesh from three sides. Despite having plenty of natural resources and highly qualified manpower, this state has not been able to provide the necessary plunge to economic development through rural entrepreneurship. Although many schemes have been implemented by the central and state governments along with private players to promote entrepreneurship, success has been remote due to the motionless outlook of the entrepreneurs. The intrusion of feelings cannot help the growth of the mind. Achievement lies beneath the mind, where motivation acts to boost up competency and helps generate flawless thinking. The result of this study reveals that motivation and skill are the prime factors to promote entrepreneurship efficiently, yet the help provided by government institutes is meager. The policymakers may choose to chalk out entrepreneurship development strategies based on the results of this study to promote newcomers with an appropriate action plan. Motivated people always tend to depend on her/his skill to prolong the business. The trait has a nexus with sustainability. Therefore, the choice or selection of profession of an individual is her/his own, but motivation is to be instilled by entrepreneurship development institutes of the country, followed by skill development. There is an immense possibility of rural entrepreneurship development, as this comprehensive study could be useful to the sponsoring agencies, administrators, micro-entrepreneurs, students, academicians, researchers, and entrepreneurship training institutes for future endeavors.
Availability of Data and Materials
The data used and analyzed in this study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.
Acknowledgment
The authors acknowledge the support extended by Tripura University, all Tripura state government departments, and all the entrepreneurs during all phases of research work.
References
Afrin, S, Islam, N., &Ahmed, S.U. (2008). A Multivariate Model of Micro Credit and Rural Women Entrepreneurship Development in Bangladesh. International Journal of Business and Management, 3(8), 169-185.Retrieved from.
Arasti, Z. (2011). An empirical study on the causes of business failure in Iranian context. African Journal of Business Management, 5(17), 7488-7498.
Audretsch, D.B, Keilbach, M.C, & Lehmann, E.E. (2006). Entrepreneurship and economic growth. Oxford University Press.
Audretsch, D.B. & Thurik., R. (2001). Linking entrepreneurship to growth.
Banerjee, A.V, & Duflo, E. (2011). Poor economics: A radical rethinking of the way to fight global poverty.
Banerjee, B. (2017). Twelfth Five Year Plan (2012–17). In DK Taneja’s Health Policies and Programmes in India.
Berger, B. (1995). The culture of modern entrepreneurship. Policy: A Journal of Public Policy and Ideas, 11(2), 3-8.
Berna, J.J. (1959). Patterns of Entrepreneurship in south India. Economic Development and cultural change, 7(3, Part 1), 343-362.
Carsrud, A.L., & Johnson, R. W. (1989). Entrepreneurship: A social psychological perspective. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 1(1), 21-31.
Chatterjee, R., Mukherjee, D., Chakraborty, G., & Deb, M. A. K. (2017). Factors Influencing Growth of Rural Entrepreneurship in Tripura: A Socio–Economic Perspective. The Journal of Innovations, 12(1), 47-57.
Collins, O.F. (1964). The enterprising man. Bureau of Business and Economic Research, Graduate School of Business Administration, Michigan State University.
Dibrell, C., Craig, J., & Hansen, E. (2011). Natural environment, market orientation, and firm innovativeness: An organizational life cycle perspective. Journal of Small Business Management, 49(3), 467-489.
Dutta, B. (2009). Entrepreneurship Management (Text and Cases). Excel Books India.
Feldman, M., Hadjimichael, T., Lanahan, L., & Kemeny, T. (2016). The logic of economic development: a definition and model for investment. Environment and Planning C: Government and Policy, 34(1), 5-21.
Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref
Government of Tripura (2007). Tripura human development report.
Griffee, R. (2019). 5 Key Factors That Influence Entrepreneurship. Small Business-Chron.com.
Grilo, I., & Thurik, R. (2005). Latent and actual entrepreneurship in Europe and the US: some recent developments. The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 1(4), 441-459.
Gupta, P.D., Guha, S., & Krishnaswami, S.S. (2013). Firm growth and its determinants. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 2(1), 1-14.
Hoselitz, B.F. (1952). Entrepreneurship and economic growth. The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, 12(1), 97-110.
Huggins, R., & Thompson, P. (2014). Culture, entrepreneurship and uneven development: A spatial analysis. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 26(9-10), 726-752.
Joo, H. (2011). Comparative analysis of rural and urban start-up entrepreneurs.
Kanitkar, A. (1994). Entrepreneurs and micro-enterprises in rural India. Economic and Political Weekly, M25-M30.
Khanka, S.S. (2006). Entrepreneurial development. S. Chand Publishing.
Knight. (1957). Risk, uncertainty and profit. Kelley & Millman, New York.
Kshetri, N. (2011). The Indian Environment for Entrepreneurship and Small Business Development. StudiaNegotia, 56 (LVI), 4, 35-52.
McClelland David C. (1961). Achieving Society.
McDowell, C. (1994). Small business objectives: an exploratory study of NSW retailers. Small Enterprise Research, 3(1-2), 65-83.
Mishra, P.N. (1987). Development Banks and the new Entrepreneurship in India. National Publishing House.
Molina, J.A. (2020). Family and entrepreneurship: New empirical and theoretical results. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 41(1), 1-3.
Momani, B. (2017). Entrepreneurship: An engine for job creation and inclusive growth in the Arab world.
MSME. (2018). MSME Annual Report 2017-18
Nandy, A. (1973). Entrepreneurical Cultures and Entrepreneurial Men. Economic and Political Weekly, M98-M106.
Nath, V. (2000). Entrepreneurship by regions and castes: A survey. Economic and Political Weekly, 4217-4221.
National Knowledge Commission Report. (2008). Entrepreneurship in India. Government of India.
North, D.C., & Thomas, R.P. (1973). The rise of the western world: A new economic history. Cambridge University Press.
NSSO 73rd Round. (2017). Key Indicators of Unincorporated Non-Agricultural Enterprises (Excluding Construction) in India NSSO 73rd Round.
OECD. (2014). Job creation and local economic development. OECD Publishing, Paris.
Olowa, O.W., & Olowa, O.A. (2015). Factors affecting entrepreneurship development in agribusiness enterprises in Lagos State, Nigeria. Global Journal of Management and Business Research.
Oza, A.N. (1988). Integrated entrepreneurship development programmes: the Indian experience. Economic and Political Weekly, M73-M79.
Pereira, A. (2007). Attitudes towards entrepreneurship in Singapore: The role of the state in cultural transition. Asian Journal of Social Science, 35(3), 321-339.
Rajagopal. (1999). Empowering Rural Women's Groups for Strengthening Economic Linkages: Some Indian Experiments. Development in Practice, 9(3), 327-330.
Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref
Schumpeter, J.A. (1934). The Theory of Economic Development. In Entrepreneurship: The Social Science View.
Shah, H. (2013). Creating an enabling environment for women’s entrepreneurship in India. Development papers, 1304, 15-25.
Shapero, A., & Sokol, L. (1982). The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign's Academy for Entrepreneurial Leadership Historical Research Reference in Entrepreneurship.
Sharma, R.C. (2016). Industrial relations and labour legislation. PHI Learning Pvt. Ltd.
Singh, S., & Saxena, S.C. (2000). Women entrepreneurs of eastern UP: Challenges and strategies of empowerment. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 36(1), 67-78.
Sinha, P. (2004). Impact of Training on First Generation Entrepreneurs in Tripura. Indian Journal of Industrial Relations, 39(4), 489-504.
Srivastava, A. (2005). Women's Self Help Groups: Findings from a study in four Indian States. Social Change, 35(2), 156-164.
Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref
Steyaert, C. (2007). ‘Entrepreneuring’as a conceptual attractor? A review of process theories in 20 years of entrepreneurship studies. Entrepreneurship and regional development, 19(6), 453-477.
Indexed at, Google scholar, Cross ref
Thornton, P. H. (1999). The sociology of entrepreneurship. Annual review of sociology, 25(1), 19-46.
Tubey, R.J. (2013). The influence of socio-economic characteristics of women entrepreneurs on the performance of their: The case of Eldoret Municipality in Uasin-Gishu County, Kenya. Herald Journal of Marketing and Business Management, 2(1), 41-46.
Van Der Heijden, H. (2000). E-tam–a revision of the technology acceptance model to explain website revisits. Research Memorandum, 29, 9457-9475.
Wilson, M.C., & Gallup, G. (1955). Extension teaching methods and other factors that influence adoption of agricultural and home economics practices. Government Printing Office, USA.
Received: 16-Dec-2021, Manuscript No. AJEE-21-10518; Editor assigned: 22-Dec-2021, PreQC No. AJEE-21-10518(PQ); Reviewed: 04- Jan-2022, QC No. AJEE-21-10518; Revised: 27-Jan-2022, Manuscript No. AJEE-21-10518(R); Published: 04-Feb-2022