GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION, EMPLOYEMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP BY ELIZABETH I. OLINMAH

GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP

BY

ELIZABETH I. OLINMAH

ABSTRACT:-This Article of gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship has been inspired by gender equality issues.   Today research and policy have been more and more fuelled by the idea that gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship are important for economic progress. Gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship were assumed to experience gender-related discrimination and to experience more difficulties when starting up and running a business than their male counterparts. Even when issues such as barriers and obstacles to gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship are raised in the gender and entrepreneurship debate, this is usually done from the perspective that gender entrepreneurs are an untapped resource and have potential to contribute to a country’s economic performance. Indeed, although one of the arguments underlying the support for gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship within the Africa and European Union, is that gender entrepreneurs have the potential to contribute to economic performance and role to play in the society at large. The global growth of gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship in the last decades has been accompanied by an increase in the number of studies on female entrepreneurship.   Despite the growing interest in women’s entrepreneurship and the radical increase in numbers over recent years, the potential of women’s entrepreneurship has only recently started to materialize.

This is clearly evident in the Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2010 women’s report, which examined the rates of entrepreneurship in 59 countries and showed that in all these countries, the rates of women’s entrepreneurship were lower than men’s entrepreneurship.

A multi‑year analysis of (2002‑2010) presented in the report shows that this gender pay gap has persisted across most economies through the years. Indeed, despite women’s increasing participation in the labour market, women remain substantially under‑represented among self‑employed workers. On average, during the 2008‑2012 period, the share of self‑employed women compared to the total number in employment is much

smaller than the corresponding share for men, across the Member States: 10 % compared with 18 %.

Keywords: Managing diversity, female entrepreneurship, economic performance, gender differences, entrepreneurial diversity

                         

INTRODUCTION: - Gender differences are more important. However, several arguments have been brought forward why the study of gender differences in entrepreneurship would not be very useful. A related argument is that the differences among women and among men are larger and more importantly than those between women and men, and accordingly, that research should focus upon these intra-group (or in-group) differences instead of intergroup (or between-group) differences (e.g., Kimmel, 2000; Ahl, 2002). In this respect, Moore (1999, p. 388) advocates that: “It is time to stop clumping entrepreneurs together in one group.

Much is to be learned by studying women entrepreneurs as members of various groups”. Also, there are likely to be differences between female entrepreneurs of different generations. Moore (1999) distinguishes between ‘traditional’ (i.e., female entrepreneurs with traditional values, adhering to stereotypical female work roles) and ‘moderns’ (i.e., later generation female entrepreneurs who are more similar to that different from their male counterparts other words, there may be a generation effect which outweighs the gender effect, where female entrepreneurs from earlier generations are different from those of later generations. Indeed, over time gender differences have become less pronounced.

We see a gender convergence rather than divergence, and women and men nowadays are far more alike than they were some decades ago (Kimmel, 2000). Obviously, there will be a range of other factors including age, educational background, firm size and sector, that may be more important in explaining differences between entrepreneurs than gender.

The article incorporates studies on gender differences in entrepreneurship, spanning different aspects of entrepreneurship at different levels of analysis, including the individual, the organization and the environment Entrepreneurship plays an important role in creating jobs, innovation and growth. Fostering entrepreneurship is a key policy goal for governments that expect that high rates

of entrepreneurial activity will create sustainable jobs like:-  

(1)        Self-employment.

(2)        Also contributes to job creation in Nigeria and beyond with at least 30 % of the self-employed have employees of their own.

The level at which self-employed sector has shown a degree of resilience during the recent economic crisis, as the relative decline in self-employment has been more moderate in comparison with salaried employment.

(3).       Against this backdrop, interest in women’s entrepreneurship has grown among scholars and policymakers. While the rationale for women’s entrepreneurship has traditionally focused on enhancing women’s equality, empowerment and social inclusion in the society of today.

(4).       its development is now seen to make good economic sense. Only in recent years has it become clear that women entrepreneurs can be a powerful economic resource tools.

(5).       World Bank studies show that women entrepreneurs make significant contributions to economic growth and poverty reduction, not only in developing countries but also in high-income countries

(6).       Women entrepreneurs create new jobs for themselves and others. Besides boosting employment, women’s entrepreneurship also supports the diversification of business, stimulating innovation and diversification in management, in production and in marketing practices as well as in products and services. Women provide different solutions to management, organizational and business problems.

(7)        The number of woman entrepreneurs has changed little in Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries. The proportion of women-owned businesses currently lies at around 30 % of the total number of businesses in OECD countries. When women do start business, they do it on a smaller scale than men and in a limited range of sectors. In addition, self-employed women experience severe gender gaps and may earn 30 % to 40 % less than their male counterparts

(8).       The gender pay gap for self-employment stands at 45 % at EU level, which vividly illustrates the extent of the disparities between women and men in this type of employment

(9).       The entry of women into the labour market in the last decade has made a decisive contribution to the pursuit of the objectives for employment. However, this favourable trend in the growth rates of female employment should not obscure the many aspects of inequality between women and men in the labour market.  These inequalities have proven to be persistent and deeply rooted in stereotypes which influence the professional and personal choices of both men and women, placing women at a disadvantage with regard to the conditions for participation in the labour market, specifically in terms of the gender pay gap and their presence in positions of leadership or economic decision-making, and men with regard to the conditions for participating in family life.    The increase in female participation in the labour market has not been counterbalanced by a corresponding rise in male participation in the responsibilities of caring for the home and family members, specifically children. Women continue to face the greatest difficulties in reconciling their professional, family and personal lives, with adverse effects on the conditions for their employability and the creation of self-employment for women.

The demands of flexible labour have had a disproportionate impact on women and men. Gender gaps persist in the use of part-time employment which, because of the divide that separates the two sexes, shows differences in the way time is spent. This has repercussions on precarious employment for women, progress in their careers, the difference in the division of family tasks and, consequently, the reconciliation of professional, personal and family life.

Feminine and Masculine stereotypes influence societal expectations about choosing a profession and thus guide women toward the social, educational and cultural realms and men toward the fields of technology and those related to the pure sciences. The growth in female employment rates is concentrated around activities and roles predominated by women. Social practices persist which assume that unpaid work resulting from taking care of a family is a primary responsibility of women and paid work resulting from economic activity is a primary responsibility of men. The same stereotypes make it difficult for women to start companies, as they face more obstacles than men in terms of credibility, confidence or access to credit.

The promotion of female entrepreneurship is a privileged instrument which ensures that men and women participate on an equal footing in the creation of businesses, one which increases employment rates for women and simultaneously improves their position in the labour market, their economic independence, social status and personal fulfillment, whilst increasing the competitiveness of Africa economies, particularly when this entrepreneurship is linked to innovation.  To strengthen the gender dimension there is a way to meet the targets for female participation in the labour market (60% in 2010), encouraging access for women to decent, high-quality jobs (more and better jobs).

Encourage female entrepreneurship as a factor for innovation and competitiveness through vocational training and re-skilling, financial incentives, micro-credit, creation of organizational networks, meetings and sharing good practices, thus fostering a positive climate for female entrepreneurs.   To promote the knowledge of female entrepreneurship by developing specific indicators as a means of exchanging good practices and monitoring the several modalities of entrepreneurship, namely innovation and sustainability entrepreneurship, as well entrepreneurship based in needs.  To promote measures which ensure that women entrepreneurs are not a target of gender discrimination.   When applying for a bank loan.  To foster increased public aid to access credit and micro-credit, not only for women who are undertaking an economic activity for the first time, but also for those activities already created, increasing the information available for possible innovative business forms.  To promote the integration of entrepreneurship education into national study programmes, establishing clear targets to eliminate gender stereotypes that influence the professional and personal choices of men and women as a way to increase the number of female entrepreneurs.  To eliminate segregation in the labour market, thus facilitating, on the one hand, the entry of women into non-traditional sectors and promoting, on the other, the presence of men in traditionally female occupations. To place greater emphasis on the lifelong education, skills and vocational training of men in the areas of care and social action and of women in the areas of knowledge, leadership, innovation and new technologies whilst also taking into account the skills acquired in informal contexts.  To overcome the disadvantage faced by men as regards the conditions for participating in family life, defining measures to foster male participation in private life, namely by creating new options at national level for paid paternity leave or increasing the possibility of non-transferable, paid parental leave. 

To promote measures which ensure maternity and paternity rights for women and men who carry out self-employment activities.   To develop specific indicators for paid and unpaid work carried out by men and women in order to generate data about the difference in the way time is spent and promote measures that support spouses of those that undertake independent work.  To develop effective measures to encourage the reintegration of women and men into employment, without a loss of skills or pay following a period of maternity or paternity leave or leave to care for dependant family members.

National plans to reform the system for calculating pensions should also prevent women from losing the right to a pension or seeing the value of their pension considerably reduced because of part-time work and interruptions in their professional career due to family obligations, considering the necessity to overcome pay gap, time gap and care gap.   To promote corporate social responsibility with regard to real equality between women and men in accessing jobs, training and career progress and in reconciling professional, personal and family life.  To motivate public and private sector companies to adopt equality plans and encouraging social partners and all participants in this social dialogue to incorporate the many dimensions of gender equality into the various levels of intervention.  To promote the adoption of political measures that ensures the elimination of gender pay gap.  To ensure that national “flexicurity” strategies adopt a gender perspective.

LITERATURE REVIEW

GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP:-Research is concerning gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship dates back to the 1970s. Before that, only men were the object of research by studies of entrepreneurship (AHL, 2006). One of the earliest articles on “female entrepreneurship “is that this research found was that of Schwartz (1976).

In it, the author addresses issues referring to motivation, personality traits and difficulties faced by women entrepreneurs.

Schwartz (1976) concluded, at the time, that the reasons that led women to set up their own businesses were similar to those of men. Moreover, both had similar “entrepreneurial qualities”.

Their differences are minimal. The researcher found, however, that women faced more barriers

hindering the success of their organizations, mainly due to difficulties in obtaining credit.

At the end of that decade, Decarlo and Lyons (1979) published the results of an investigation carried

Out with 122 women. The researchers described the profile of the group of entrepreneurs and compared it with that of other groups of women. Quantitative in nature, the data provided information on the “profile” of women entrepreneurs and contributed to research that was carried out later. Despite finding that women entrepreneurs differed from women in general there is need for additional research to reach more useful results.

Our research found a small number of articles published in the 1970s. However, the 1980s, when

compared to the previous decade, emerged as a period in which, at least quantitatively, research on “female’s entrepreneurship” has increased.   This can be explained, at least in theory, by an increase in female participation in the labour market, not only as employees but as employers and owners of their own businesses.

The present study revealed that international academic literature on the subject was limited to the

northern hemisphere. Robert Hisrich and Candida Brush are, for example, scholars who continue to

investigate the phenomenon, sometimes carrying out research alone, sometimes among themselves or with other partners, even from other institutions and countries.  In the early 1980s, Hisrich and O’Brien (1981) predicted that, although the presence of women in entrepreneurial activities was insignificant, their participation would increase in almost all fields.

When carrying out research on 40 female entrepreneurs, Hisrich and O’Brien (1981) found that they had difficulties referring to access to credit, obtaining guarantees and overcoming a female negative image. The survey results showed that the problems faced referred to the type of business and not to the level of education or experience of the respondents.

In 1984, Hisrich and Brush, considering there was little knowledge about women entrepreneurs, carried out a survey of 468 entrepreneurs and described their profile, their motivation, their skills, and the problems and characteristics of their businesses. In the same decade, Hisrich and Brush (1987) analyzed the results of a longitudinal study of female entrepreneurs and, again, investigated their personal characteristics, family practices, management skills, propensity to take risks, problems and business growth rate. Like Hisrich and Brush (1984,1987), Joe (1987) believed that female engagement in entrepreneurial activity was increasing, although little is known about these women. Thus, he explained the rise of women in the condition of businesswomen numerically, in the Africa and outside the country from the mid-1970s to mid-1980s, crediting part of the growth to stimulus by the administration of President Jimmy Carter, who created programs to support women entrepreneurs: there was an understanding that their businesses impacted the American economy in a positive way. However, surveys were not limited to the USA alone but also in Africa too. In the UK, Watkins and Watkins (1983) presented the results of a survey of women entrepreneurs and compared the experience of men and women. The authors concluded that women entrepreneurs, due to involuntary factors and conscious decision, were restricted to stereotypically feminine areas. In the authors’ opinion, women would work in any business segment facing true acceptance by society of their presence in the labour market as businesswomen, when offered equal conditions. Watkins and Watkins (1983) pointed out that the differences between men and women were not necessarily biological, but social.    

Buttner and Rosen (1988) discussed the power and influence of gender stereotypes in the business environment.  The researchers investigated whether women entrepreneurs were seen in terms of gender stereotypes when securing financing institutions, and concluded that bank loan officers had a generalized and prejudiced understanding those women would have less chance of achieving success when compared to men, since they did not possess the “attributes” required to be true entrepreneurs.  Also in the UK, Carter (1989) published the results of research carried out on women entrepreneurs, considering that their businesses’ dynamics and performance were specific to their condition.   In a way, she explained that the differences between men and women occurred due to personal and differentiated behavior, motivation and ambition, also because women had a particular criterion, that was not merely economic, to evaluate success. Similarly, in the USA, Wilkens (1989:15) also defended the idea that women needed to accept their “typically feminine strengths and recognize” that these strengths would provide a solid basis for the development and success of their careers as entrepreneurs. Carter’s (1989) and Wilkens’ (1989) understanding of the differences referred more to aspects of a personal nature, instead of what was suggested by Buttner and Rosen (1988).  Other studies have sought to get to know women entrepreneurs by comparing them to their male versions. Indeed, comparative study has always been present in academic literature on the subject (CARTER, 1989; Reese and Dubini (1989) investigated networks of female and male entrepreneurs in the USA and Italy. They did not observe any significant differences between the two countries. However, they did identify significant differences between networks made up of men and those made up of women. Taking into account the small number of women in personal networks, the researchers found substantial disparities between male and female “worlds”. Inspired by the work of Aldrich, Reese and Dubini (1989), Cromie and Birley (1992) carried out similar research in Northern Ireland. The researchers concluded that women, when compared to men, are less active in networks, develop networks that are less dense, are more inclined to argue with other women, and consider their family members the most important people in their network.  Our research found that, up till now, in the search for differences between male and women entrepreneurs, demographics and family, occupational and educational data prevail.   In other words, research has also used a more quantitative approach. However, we identified work such as that of Neider (1987), which attempted to combine open-ended interviews with psychological testing and observation, in order to investigate the personality, demographic and organizational characteristics of the businesses of 52 women in Florida. Despite the fact that she used several research techniques, she also ended up drawing a “psychological profile” of entrepreneurial women. The researcher found that, in these entrepreneurial women, certain “characteristics” such as high energy levels, persistence and ability to influence others prevailed. The literature review carried out so far reveals that methodologies with a quantitative approach prevailed.   In other words, the articles analyzed allow us to say that the 1980s were marked by studies that were, in most cases, quantitative and empirical, that tried to characterize, or rather draw a “profile” of entrepreneurial women. So much so that Sexton and Kent (1981), in order to identify the psychological characteristics that distinguish female executives and women entrepreneurs, compared the behavior of 45 executives and 48 entrepreneurs, concluding that they had more similarities than differences. The following year, Smith, McCain and Warren (1982) published the results of a survey carried out with 76 entrepreneurs in San Francisco, in the United States. This classified the entrepreneurs as crafts-oriented and opportunistic. Compared to men, women showed a trend towards opportunistic behavior and attitudes.   As precursors, these studies introduced women in the debate on entrepreneurship, and presented preliminary data regarding the condition of women as businesswomen and entrepreneurs in several countries. The contributions of these surveys tended primarily towards formulating normative empirical studies designed to identify demographic and personality characteristics concerning women, and even to trace their “behavioral profile”. In essence, these studies were restricted to identifying and describing the characteristics of entrepreneurial women, looking for certain attributes in their “essence”.  Thus, we can conclude that, in the 1970s and 1980s, international scientific production was still caught up in the vision of biological determinism – that places gender as the triggering element of differences – and few studies discussed the role of sociocultural context on the construction of the meanings of manhood

and womanhood.   Although we are not incurring in any kind of generalization, research carried out

over the next decade did not behave very differently.  

THE ECONOMIC CONTRIBUTION OF GENDER EQUALITY IN EDUCATION, EMPLOYMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP:-There are different ways in which gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship (whether in established businesses or in new venture creation) can be measured.

First, one can investigate the number of female entrepreneurs per (female) labour force (i.e., female entrepreneurial activity).

Second, one can have a look at the female share in total entrepreneurial activity (i.e., female entrepreneurial participation).

Whereas the first measures female entrepreneurship vis-à-vis the number of women in the labor force, while the second measures female entrepreneurship vis-à-vis the total number of entrepreneurs.  These discuss gender equality in education, employment and entrepreneurship from both perspectives, also distinguishing between self-employment and new venture activity.

Because female entrepreneurship rates are not similar across countries, the present section also touches upon some country differences, but this is not the main focus of the present section. Although it is interesting to see where cross-country differences in female entrepreneurship come from, at the end of the day a more important question (in particular for policy makers) is whether these differences lead to variation in economic performance across countries. Hence, special attention is paid to the relationship between female entrepreneurship and economic performance.

GENDER DIVERSITY AND ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE:-This is assumed that female and male entrepreneurs have a different profile, e.g., they have a different way of doing business and start to  run different types of firms. Thus, female entrepreneurs can contribute to the diversity in entrepreneurial activity and economic performance by way of their distinctive characteristics.

In terms of products and services it may be argued that female entrepreneurs tend to operate in niche markets. Female entrepreneurs often pursue a specialization strategy offering tailor-made goods and services (Chaganti and Parasuraman, 1996). Assuming that tailor-made products and services are different from other products offered within the industry, it can be said that female entrepreneurs offer new non-competing or complementary products, insulating them from competition. Because over time consumer demand has become more versatile (Brock and Evans, 1989), niche markets have become more important, i.e., diversity in demand has to be met by diversity in supply of goods and services. From this perspective it may be important to stimulate female entrepreneurship, in particular as at present the share of women in entrepreneurial activity is still below 40 percent compare to men entrepreneur of today.

Hence, stimulating female entrepreneurship may be a way to increase entrepreneurial diversity.

Overview of gender differences in entrepreneurship within entrepreneurship research, female entrepreneurship can be considered a ‘separate’ field of study.  Researchers focusing upon the issue of female entrepreneurship have traditionally been female, and still continue to be. In general entrepreneurship appears to have become more aware of the possibility of gender differences and gender is increasingly used as a control variable.  To give an overview of the many studies undertaken in the area of gender issues in entrepreneurship, this builds upon review articles by Brush (1992), Ahl (2002) and a review of studies identified in Gatewood et al (2003).  

The aim is not to provide a full picture of research in the area of female entrepreneurship, but rather to give the reader an idea of the state of research on gender issues in entrepreneurship. The subject of the present is situated at the intersection of two broad fields of study: entrepreneurship and gender. Research on female entrepreneurship can be structured around different themes. Brush (1992) uses Gartner’s (1985) framework distinguishing between four key components of new venture creation:

                  Individual,

                  Process,

                  Organization, and

                  Environment.  

Here the same classification is used for gender differences with respect to the different subjects within the field of entrepreneurship.

Most studies on female entrepreneurship focus upon the individual, covering topics such as motivations, demographics and background characteristics (such as education and experience). Up to the early 1990s research on female entrepreneurship identified gender differences with respect to individual characteristics. Brush (1992; p.13) concludes that: “women business owners are more different from that of men in terms of individual level characteristics such as education, occupational experience, motivations, and circumstances of business start-up/acquisition”.   However, contemporary research indicates that for a range of individual characteristics (including psychological, attitudinal and personal background factors) there are more similarities than differences between female and male entrepreneurs (e.g., Ahl, 2002). With respect to research intensity, the ‘individual’ studies are followed by studies on the environment, organization and process of entrepreneurship, respectively (Ahl, 2002) .   In particular the number of studies dealing with environmental aspects has increased since the early 1990s.

The process of starting up and running a business as well as environmental influences on entrepreneurial activity seem relatively similar for female and male entrepreneurs (e.g., Ahl, 2002). However, in terms of organizational characteristics businesses of women have been found to be more different from than similar to businesses of men. In particular, this is found for sales volumes, management styles, goals, and the acquisition of start-up capital (Brush, 1992). Ahl (2002) finds that the scarce research (usually studies with few observations) focusing upon organization refers to a distinctive (relational) management style of female entrepreneurs as compared to that of male entrepreneurs. The most consistent gender differences are found for firm size and sector, where businesses of women are on average smaller than those of men (whether measured in terms of financial indicators or employees) and with female entrepreneurs being more likely to operate retail or service firms. In addition to studies that fall into one of the categories– individual, organization, environment, and process – there are studies that are more comprehensive, taking into account and covering several aspects at the same time. For example, studies classified as mixed studies include overview articles and investigating individual and firm performance.   In the review of performance argues that the topic of firm performance has become more popular in female entrepreneurship studies in the past decade. Until the early 1990s this topic did not receive much attention.

And if preferences are taken into account there appears to be no support for the proposed gender differences in entrepreneurial performance.

With respect to the particular subjects dealt within each of the categories, it can be said that environment studies mostly focus upon resource availability and (to a lesser extent) support structures for female entrepreneurs. The organization studies emphasize business profile characteristics, such as sector, firm size and age. Process studies tend to focus upon the process of new venture creation, including topics such as networking and resource acquisition. In addition, most studies within the area of performance differentials focus upon firm performance. Although individual studies in the area of female entrepreneurship have a broad focus, they tend to focus upon Perspectives on Gender Differences Nature versus nurture There are two basic schools of thought proposing different reasons for the existence of gender differences (in general): biological determinism (referred to as nature) and differential socialization (referred to as nurture), the latter of which has served as input for the social feminist perspective.

Biological arguments for gender differences generally draw upon three streams of research, including evolutionary theory, brain research and endocrinological research on sex hormones. The implication of the biological determinism perspective is that because differences between women and men are attributed to their different biological nature, one automatically assumes that the existing societal arrangements between women and men are inevitable, dismantling the need for policy intervention and support structures. Social scientists refute the perspective that innate biological differences lead to behavioral differences which – in turn – construct the social, political and economic environment.

They argue that gender inequality in society leads to observable differences in behaviors, attitudes and traits. The differential socialization school of thought assumes that women and men are different because they are taught to be different. In essence both the biological determinism perspective and the socialization view assume that women and men behave differently, and that

they are different from each other. Moreover, both streams of thought assume that the differences between men and women are greater and more decisive (and therefore more worthy of study) than the differences within groups of women and men.

SOCIAL VERSUS LIBERAL FEMINISM:-The identified gender differences in entrepreneurship research have been explained in different ways, either assuming that women and men are different from each other or that they are in essence the same and the environment causes them to behave in different ways. These perspectives are consistent with the social and liberal feminist perspective, respectively (Fischer et al., 1993). According to the social feminist perspective gender differences in entrepreneurship are due to differences in early and ongoing socialization.

Hence, female and male entrepreneurs are inherently different, giving rise to different ways of

viewing the world and, accordingly, different ways in which entrepreneurship is practiced.

The liberal feminist perspective argues that in essence women and men are the same and that female

entrepreneur experiences are more problematic or structures their firms in a distinct way (as compared to male entrepreneurs) because they are confronted with unequal access to resources and gender-based discrimination. To summarize this, both perspectives which are female and male entrepreneurs expect a different way, either determined by situational differences and/ or barriers (liberal feminism) or by dispositional differences and/or barriers (social feminism).

A different way of explaining gender.

A difference in entrepreneurship is by investigating situational factors that are correlated with gender. Female and male entrepreneurs may behave in the same fashion, provided they have the same personal and business profile.

For instance, because female entrepreneurs tend to have smaller firms, their firms are characterized

by different performance rates and organizational structure. This perspective on studying and explaining gender differences may be more similar to that different from the two perspectives

proposed above.   Indeed, differences in the personal and business profile of female and male entrepreneurs may be explained by situational or dispositional differences.

Despite a major difficulty in examining and measuring entrepreneurship due to the blurred boundaries separating it from self-employment the literature shows that women still face a great

number of difficulties and obstacles in establishing and running businesses.

These include:

                  Access to finance

                  Unfavourable Business Regulations

                  Cultural Barriers

                  Choice of Business Types and Sectors

                  Information and Training Gaps

                  Lack of Contacts and

                  Access to Social

                  Support and Networking

                  Educational and Occupational Segregation

                  Competing Demands on Time

                  Double Burden of Home and Work Responsibilities.

Although most of these difficulties are common to both women and men, evidence suggests that the

barriers faced by women entrepreneurs are often significantly greater than those experienced by

their male peers.

GENDER AND ACCESS TO CREDIT, FINANCE AND CAPITAL:-Access to credit finance is a common barrier to women starting and growing a business. There are considerable differences between women and men entrepreneurs in terms of their financial arrangements and the sectors they operate in.   Bank loans are traditionally the route to finance for many businesses but during the realignment of the banking sector, this path has been and continues to be reduced, according to a survey by the European Central Bank.  Although no breakdown by gender is included and both women and men

face similar reductions in loans, recent studies suggest that barriers in accessing credit and finance

are higher for women. The reasons for this include lack of traditional collateral (such as land or

property, which is often registered in men’s names), women’s lower income levels relative to men’s

and financial institutions’ inability (or lack of interest) to design appropriate products and out-

reach strategies for women.  A gateway to the use of financial services is the ownership of a bank

account. The Global Findex, a comprehensive database measuring how people save, borrows and man-age risk in 148 countries reveals that women are less likely than men to have formal bank

accounts. With regard to EU Member States specifically, studies carried out in France found

that 10 % of women entrepreneurs wish to receive support from banks, which is a third lower than

their male counterparts. Similarly, a UK study found that women entrepreneurs are less amenable to

institutional finance, such as overdrafts, bank loans and supplier credit. Even if they can gain access

to a loan, women often lack access to other financial services such as savings, digital payment

methods and insurance. Lack of financial education can also limit women's ability to gain access to

and benefit from financial services.

Equal access to capital is not yet a reality. In 2008, only 20.3 % of EU businesses started with

venture capitals were run by women. Three factors may explain these differences: women own fewer financial assets and have shorter credit histories (given their lack of entrepreneurial experience), both of which are valued by credit providers; given the sectors women are active in and the size of their companies, their projects are generally less capital intensive; there might also be some bias reflecting a lack of confidence in women entrepreneurs, an idea reinforced by the fact that women are less represented in financing activities and networks.    Also, because of the unequal access to capital, when they become self-employed, women tend to operate smaller businesses in sectors that are different from those of men and largely mirror segregation patterns in the labour market. These factors can then translate into lower levels of labour productivity and earnings and a greater risk of poverty for women who are self-employed compared with women employees.

Networking opportunities for women entrepreneurs.   Having access to a strong network of business

partners can be a highly important factor in achieving entrepreneurial success. The tendency to

network does not appear to differ significantly between women and men entrepreneurs and the size

of the networks to which they both have access to is similar. Prejudices and stereotypes about women in business prevailing entrepreneurial role models reflect a masculine bias and this is reinforced in popular media, education and government policy. Studies indicate that one effect of this ‘masculine’ entrepreneurial discourse is that women can feel out of place in this domain.  This bias affects women’s perceptions about their entrepreneurial ability and those of other relevant stakeholders supporting business creation and growth (including the banking and venture capital system, other entrepreneurs and their networks, potential customers, etc.).

Stereotypes and the lower exposure of women to other women role models might explain why they

report less interest in entrepreneurial careers and feel less able to become successful entrepreneurs

Generally speaking, the concept of entrepreneurship carries more positive connotations than self

-employment and refers to a higher quality form of participation in the labour market, one

characterized by deliberate choice and the pursuit of self-realization. By contrast, self-employment

is often seen as a path that individuals, especially women, choose out of necessity. These assumptions may reflect stereotypical gendered expectations surrounding entrepreneurship and self-

employment, which, in turn, reproduce masculine norms of entrepreneurial behaviour.

Entrepreneurship has traditionally been constructed as a masculine field — men own a larger share

of businesses and they overwhelmingly outnumber women in industries such as technology, which

receive the most attention from the media, the general public and policymakers. Women entrepreneurs are concentrated in low-growth and low-skilled business sectors such as retailing and

services, which are dismissively labeled as ‘mice’, ‘failure’ and ‘plodder’, compared with high-

growth ‘gazelle’ businesses that is commonly associated with men. 

Furthermore, entrepreneurship case studies are mostly about men (e.g. Bill Gates, Donald Trump,

Sam Walton) and most role models in entrepreneurship tend to be men.

Women’s entrepreneurship is a key issue for the European institutions. Since 2005, to ensure that

small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) would benefit from the measures identified in the

Lisbon Strategy, the European Commission undertook to work with national authorities to address

those areas, such as access to credit and entrepreneurial networks, where the needs of women

entrepreneurs were not sufficiently met.  The European policies for women entrepreneurs have therefore pursued first of all the main objective of spreading entrepreneurial mindsets among women, encouraging and financially supporting the start-up of business activity by women.

FEMALE ENTREPRENEURSHIP:-Interestingly, the female coefficient increases slightly in absolute value after the inclusion of the main controls and does not change after inclusion of assets. The change in the marginal effects estimate from Specification 3 to Specification 4 is primarily due to the higher percentage of women who are not employed and the higher rate of entry from non-employment than from wage/salary employment into self-employment. This finding suggests that the female/male difference in self-employment entry rates would be slightly larger if not for the initial difference in non-employment rates. As expected, controlling for other variables has little effect on the female coefficient estimate because men and women have very similar characteristics.

Women are much less likely than men to enter self-employment, all else equal. Similar results are found using micro-data from the European Union. Blanch flower (2000, 2004) finds large female/male differences in the probability of being self-employed after including education and other measurable.   Recent studies focusing on gender differences in self-employment provide some

interesting findings, but provide only limited direct evidence on the question of what explains the

large gender difference in self-employment rates. For example, these studies find that women who are married to self-employed men are more likely to be self-employed or enter self-employment and that the choice of self-employment is partly driven by the desire for flexible schedules and other family-related reasons for women relative to men (Bruce 1999, Boden 1996, 1999, Carr 1996, Devine 1994b, Lombard 2001, and Lohmann 2001).  Gender earnings differentials in the wage/salary sector may contribute, but there is also considerable evidence indicating large female/male earnings differences in the self-employment sector (Aronson 1991, Devine 1994b, Hundley 2000 and U.S. Bureau of the Census 2004). In the end, unobservable factors, such as different preferences, discrimination, and risk aversion, may be responsible for low levels of female entrepreneurship.  As noted above, an interesting finding is that a lower percentage of young women than men report a desire for being self-employed in the United States (Kourilsky and Walstad 1998). Using a combined sample from many countries, Blanch flower, Oswald and Stutzer (2001) also find a lower probability of preferring self-employment among women after controlling for other factors. In both cases, however, the differences are not large and represent roughly 15 percentage points.   Individual characteristics as well as country dummies.

A few core objectives motivate the emphasis on women’s entrepreneurship. In the developed countries, support for female entrepreneurship is part of a general push to stimulate growth. The focus on growth applies also to men’s entrepreneurship, of course, but the notion that women lag behind

men in both starting businesses and achieving growth calls more attention to the females. For

the developing countries, however, the core emphasis in international discourse shifts strongly toward women’s entrepreneurship as a poverty alleviation strategy. The poverty agenda comes into play largely because women invest earnings in children and community, thus producing a positive ripple effect that does not manifest in the same way for men’s incomes. Facilitating women’s entrepreneurship thus has become a preferred tactic for economic development.

For all countries, the call to support women’s entrepreneurship also falls under an overall charge to “close the gender gap” across economic domains, including formal

employment, financial access, and so on.

Such calls have come from the World Bank and OECD, for instance, and tend to focus on the generalized benefits that are believed to accrue from gender equality, including better use of national resources, reduction in disease and hostility, improved human capital, as well as increased growth.

Women constitute roughly half of Nigerian’s population and by extension half of the work force. As

a group, women do as much work as men if not more. However, the types of work as well as the

condition under which women work and their access to opportunities for advancement differs from

men.

Women are, often, disadvantaged compared to men in access to employment opportunities and

conditions of work; furthermore, many women forgo or curtail employment because of family

responsibilities. The removal of obstacles and inequalities that women face with respect to

employment is a step towards realizing women’s potential in the economy and enhancing their

contribution to economic and social development.

The Beijing Declaration affirms national commitment to the inalienable rights of women and girls

and their empowerment and equal participation in all spheres of life including the economic domain. The Beijing Platform for Action (BPA), identifies women’s role in the economy as a critical area of

concern and calls attention to the need to promote and facilitate women’s equal access to

employment and resources as well as the harmonization of work and family responsibilities for

women and men.

Furthermore, the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) targets the achievement of full and

productive employment and decent work for all including women and young people as part of MDG 1 to eradicate extreme poverty and hunger. Some progress has been made towards these ends, but

the gains are uneven.

This chapter examines trends over the last 8 years and describes the current situation of women and men in the labour force, employment and unemployment.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY:- Researchers use various methods to validate their hypothesis which is usually specified as a negation of the objective. Usually, data availability and an investigator’s expertise define his approach. To effectively explore the major dimensions of the arguments of this paper which has the objective of showing that women’s empowerment – unlimited by their gender, either through employment or education – will lead to an increase in output per capita and poverty reduction in the study chose Nigeria with less than moderate women’s

involvement in economic and corporate activities for the period 1970-2012 using World Bank data. The linkage model is Meier & Rauch’s, (2005) which portrays an economic development worth

sustaining as one where an increase in real per capita GDP is not counteracted by increases in either poverty or inequality. This study used the Bound Testing technique popularized by a number of scholars (Pesaran et al., 2001; Pesaran and Shin, 1999; Pesaran and Smith, 1998).

An empirical analysis of labour market outcomes for a cross-national sample of college students commissioned by the OECD and the World Bank sheds more light on the linkages between genders

differences in performance in education, career choices in tertiary education and subsequent labour market

outcomes. Its initial findings include:

·          Women are slightly more likely than men to obtain a tertiary degree but these are more often in the first level of tertiary education (e.g. Bachelor) than in the post-graduate level (e.g. Masters or Ph.D.).

·          Most of the individuals in the survey work as professionals or skilled technicians, with a few

holding less skilled positions (clerks) and a negligible minority holding more senior positions – which is consistent with the fact that the survey covers college graduates with about five years of work experience. Within these occupation categories, more men than women work in senior and professional positions.

·          Gender is a significant determinant of the choice of field of study, even when ability, the

perceived quality of the programme and family background are controlled for. The "quality" of the programme has a positive effect on choosing sciences but negative on choosing humanities and "ability" has a slightly larger effect on the choices made by men compared with those made by women.

·          Focusing only on professional and skilled technicians, there are strong asymmetries by gender in the correlation between field of study and occupation. Almost 70% of the female graduates from the field of humanities work as teachers compared with about 50% of the male graduates. Most of the differences concern teaching occupations and professions related to physics, mathematics and engineering. The majority (about 55%) of the male graduates in sciences work as professionals in physics, mathematics and engineering as opposed to 33% of the female graduates. Overall, only 7.5% of women work in these fields while physics, mathematics and engineering is the second favorite field for men.

Women are more concentrated in teaching.

DATA ANALYSIS

OCCUPATION:	PHYSICS, MATHEMATICS AND ENGINEERING	LIFE SCIENCE AND HEALTH	TEACHING	OTHER	TOTAL
Field of study, Males
HUMANITIES	7.94	0.89	52.36	38.80	100.00
SOCIAL SCIENCES	13.40	1.14	7.71	77.75	100.00
SCIENCE	55.32	18.40	13.80	12.49	100.00
HEALTH	8.35	76.56	3.12	11.97	100.00
TOTAL	23.03	15.44	16.79	44.74	100.00

 (Table 1.1) Occupation choice by field of study completed for professionals and technicians - Male 

OCCUPATION:	PHYSICS, MATHEMATICS AND ENGINEERING	LIFE SCIENCE AND HEALTH	TEACHING	OTHER	TOTAL
Field of study, Females
HUMANITIES	1.98	1.70	68.43	27.89	100.00
SOCIAL SCIENCES	5.45	2.43	11.42	80.70	100.00
SCIENCE	33.65	28.91	22.12	15.32	100.00
HEALTH	5.61	69.89	5.15	19.35	100.00
TOTAL	7.54	21.06	29.92	41.48	100.00

(Table 1.1) Occupation choice by field of study completed for professionals and technicians –

Female 

In Gender Equality in Education, Employment and entrepreneurship occupations are the sub-major groups from the International Standard Classification of Occupations. Examples of occupations at the minor group level that correspond to the sub-major group level occupation other are: Business and legal professionals, creative professionals, finance and sales associate professionals.

FINDINGS:-Gender differences in employment and education are likely to play a role in gender differences in entrepreneurship. Women’s under-representation among employed managers not only provides them with less direct experience of managing businesses compared with men, but it also hinders the likelihood of successful bids for start-up loans. Moreover, women’s lower average earnings endow them with fewer saving for starting a business. Importantly, under-capitalization at start-up impacts negatively on the survival rates and growth prospects of firms. Occupational segregation reinforces the concentration of women-owned enterprises in service sectors and jeopardizes women’s prospects as entrepreneurs in high-growth sectors.

The knowledge base on female entrepreneurship has increased markedly in recent years (Minniti,

2009). Research has focused on women business owners ’ characteristics and development, women’s motivations for starting and leading a business, women’s leadership styles and management strategies; and barriers encountered by women business owners. Arguably, financing issues are those that triggered the keenest gender-based discussions.

Policy development has to address the needs of women entrepreneurs and particular policy

lessons include ensuring equal property and inheritance rights; strengthening financial education and encouraging dissemination of financial information to women; facilitating access to public support services; fostering a positive image of entrepreneurship amongst women; promoting development of women entrepreneurship networks; and, supporting mentoring and coaching programmes (OECD, 2000 and OECD, 2004).

There is still lack of knowledge on the role of women’s entrepreneurship in the society and the

economy, as well as on the specific obstacles met by women entrepreneurs. This is mainly because the analytical activity has been relying mainly on qualitative data and case-based cross country analysis, largely drawing on the experiences of advanced economies. Cross-national analysis remains scant. A more global and diversified analysis of female entrepreneurial activities is needed for solid policy development and policy transferability across countries, as for example through the OECD-MENA Women's Business Forum.

CONCLUSIONS:-The present thesis shows that female and male entrepreneurs differ significantly with respect to arrange of aspects of entrepreneurship. The studies show that there is evidence of gender differences in entrepreneurship both at the macro and the micro level. At the macro level the present thesis shows that there is some evidence of a positive relationship between female entrepreneurship (vis-à-vis male entrepreneurship) and economic performance at both the regional and country level.

With respect to the determinants of entrepreneurship at the macro level it is found that the factors influencing female and male entrepreneurship are similar rather than different. Most of the factors

that influence entrepreneurship in general, also influence female entrepreneurship.

However, differential effects have been found for unemployment and life satisfaction, suggesting

that the female share in self-employment is influenced by those factors. At the micro level most of the gender differences are attributable to indirect effects, although some evidence has also been found for direct gender effects.   Even though most of the micro-level studies find some evidence for the existence of direct gender effects, these may be residual effects that exist because it is virtually impossible to take into account all factors that influence entrepreneurship. The present thesis has studied the characteristics of the average female entrepreneur, the profile of which has been described in one of the previous paragraphs. However, it may be that new generations operate their businesses in a different way than older generations of female entrepreneurs. It is therefore interesting to investigate the (differences in) profile of younger and older female entrepreneurs. In general, the information on female entrepreneurship can be enriched by investigating different types of female entrepreneurs in addition to the average female entrepreneur. For example, part-time versus full-time female entrepreneurs; married versus single female entrepreneurs; female entrepreneurs with and without children; and women running service versus production firms. Distinguishing between different types of female entrepreneurs also enables the comparison with male entrepreneurs in similar circumstances. Furthermore, this thesis has studied gender diversity in entrepreneurship in terms of individual and business characteristics. Most of the studies deal with business structuring and the input side of the business, focusing upon time investments, financial structure, (human resource) management, and organizational structure. The output side has not been investigated and, although there have been several studies investigating performance differentials between businesses of women and men; there is still need for further research. First, research should explore the type of output female entrepreneurs produce and the extent to which these are unique and contribute to entrepreneurial diversity. For example, because female entrepreneurs tend to pursue combinations of goals, they may also be more likely to engage in social entrepreneurship. Second, we have seen that businesses of women tend to be small, and are less likely to experience growth. Arguing that female entrepreneurship is important for economic performance thus seems a paradox. Future research may be able to unravel this paradox by focusing both upon the quantitative and qualitative contribution of (female) entrepreneurs. To summarize, the relations between female entrepreneurship, entrepreneurial diversity and economic performance should be further explored in empirical studies . Measurement issues are crucial here as female entrepreneurship can be measured in different ways .If the aim is to investigate the link between entrepreneurial diversity and economic performance, researchers should take the female share in entrepreneurial activity (as a measure of entrepreneurial diversity) as a starting point.

Using female entrepreneurial activity rates (measured vis-à-vis the labor force) is likely to only establish a link between entrepreneurial activity and economic performance, as countries with relatively high total entrepreneurial activity rates also tend to be characterized by relatively high female entrepreneurial activity rates. Finally, future research on gender issues in entrepreneurship should explore different ways of approaching and measuring gender. In the present thesis gender is measured by way of biological sex. In this way sex and gender coincide.

RECOMMENDATIONS:-Despite the contribution of each study, since, overall, they provided relevant data and information about enterprising women, many researches were limited to describing, in a fragmented way, small segments of the population of women entrepreneurs, and did not advance in applying and developing theory. Incidentally, this was also the perception of Moore (1990), when analyzing the literature that had been produced in previous years about women entrepreneurs. 

Moreover, in most cases, the studies were quantitative and empirical in nature and limited themselves to attempting to draw a “profile” of enterprising women.

This attempt led to many studies that sought to highlight the differences between men and women through demographic, family, occupational and educational data.

On the one hand, this data contributed significantly to knowledge about enterprising women.

On the other, it reinforced the stereotype that women had an “essence” which defined their skills and attributes. In other words, it appears that an artificial naturalization process led researchers to believe that male or women entrepreneurs are people endowed with certain characteristics that are “naturally” determined.

Incidentally, it seems that much of the research did not realize that essentialist conceptions have guided academic production on “female entrepreneurship”.   

The extremely persuasive structuring of this speech can be so deeply imbued in societies that it is not surprising that literature on “women entrepreneurs” did not escape from it unscathed.

Few studies specifically developed a theoretical analysis on the topic “gender”.

Apparently, the recurring concern of many works was the sexual structure of the organizations and its implications on business activities.

Thus, it seems appropriate to bring to the debate a discussion concerning the need to use new lenses to study the “female entrepreneurship” phenomenon, at least to establish new directions for research.

The need for additional research to be undertaken to come to any kind of conclusion regarding the alleged establishment of an “enterprising profile” of women was felt by several researchers.

Ahl (2006), for example, when he found that, despite intentions to the contrary, academic literature dealing with “female entrepreneurship” harbored certain discursive practices that reproduce women’s subordination, that is, that recreated the idea that companies managed by women played a secondary and less significant role compared to those led by men, suggested that future research on the topic broaden their object of research and change their epistemological position.

The research of Ahl (2006) reinforced the initial perception that there seems to be a lack of epistemological diversity in the scientific production dealing with “female entrepreneurship”, of enterprising women, of women who own companies etc., since a substantial part of the studies seem to understand sex/gender as a variable and not as a frame of reference. 

Despite the predominance of research of a normative nature, we observed an increase in the number of studies that see gender as a social construct that ensures women’s subordination to men and, especially, that understands that sex and gender are discursive practices that constitute specific subjectivities by means of power and resistance in the materiality of human bodies.

They, above all, not only propose the denaturalization and deconstruction of discursive practices considered universal but also give voice to ethnic minorities, which are not addressed in the mainstream, and problematize the concept of gender as constituted in the West.

The compilation carried out here sought to mirror the national and international academic production on “female entrepreneurship”, mainly in journals and conference annals from the field of administration. It shows the birth of a field of research, its transformation and its coming-of-age pari passu with changes in society, in the labor market and in academy. Despite these advances, there is still a long way to go.

REFERENCES

AHL, H. Why research on women entrepreneurs needs new directions, Entrepreneurship Theory

and Practice , [S. l.], v. 30, n.5, p. 595-621, Sept. 2006.

ALDRICH, H.; REESE, P. R.; DUBINI, P. Women on the verge of a breakthrough?: networking among entrepreneurs in the United States and Italy. In: VESPER, K. H. (Ed.)

Frontiers of entrepreneurship research. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Babson College, p. 560-574, 1989.

ALLEN, K. R.; CARTER, N. M. Women entrepreneurs: profile differences across high and low performing adolescent firms.

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 1996. ALSOS, G. A.; ISAKSEN, E. J.; LJUNGGREN,

E. New venture financing and subsequent business growth in men-and women-led businesses.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,[S. l.], v. 30, n. 5, p. 667-686, Sept. 2006.

ARRIBAS, I.; VILA, J. E. Human capital determinants of the survival of entrepreneurial service firms in Spain.

The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, [S.l.], v. 3, n. 3, p. Sept. 2007.

BECKER-BLEASE, J. R.; SOHL, J. E. Do women-owned businesses have equal access to angel capital?

Journal of Business Venturing, Amsterdam, v. 22, n. 4, p. 503-521, July 2007.

BIERNACKI, P., WALDORF, D. Snowball sampling: problems and techniques of chain referral sampling.

Sociological Methods & Research, [S. l.], v. 2, n. 2, p.141-163, Nov. 1981.

BOOHENE, R.; SHERIDAN, A.; KOTEY, B. Gender, personal values, strategies and small

business performance.

Equal Opportunities International, [S. l.], v. 27, n. 3, p. 237-257, 2008.BJÖRNSSON, B.; ABRAHA, D. Counselling encounters between banks and entrepreneurs: a gender perspective. International Journal of Bank Marketing, Bradford, v. 23, n. 6, p. 444-463, 2005.

BOOHENE, R.; SHERIDAN, A.; KOTEY, B. Gender, personal values, strategies and small

business performance.

Equal Opportunities International, [S. l.], v. 27, n. 3, p. 237-257, 2008. BOTHA, M.; NIEMAN, G.; VUUREN, J.

Enhancing female entrepreneurship by enabling access to skills. Entrepreneurship Management,

[S. l.], v. 2, n. 4, p. 479-493, Dec. 2006.

BRUIN, A.; FLINT-HARTLE, S. Entrepreneurial women and private capital: the New Zealand

perspective.

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, [S. l.], v. 11, n. 2, p. 108-128, 2005.

BUTTNER, E. H.; ROSEN, B. Bank loan officers’ perceptions of the characteristics of men,

women, and successful entrepreneurs.

Journal of Business Venturing, Amsterdam, v. 3, n. 3, p. 249-258, Summer 1988.CANTZLER, I.; LEIJON, S. Team-oriented women entrepreneurs: a way to modern management.

Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Bradford, v. 14, n. se CARTER, N. M. The role of risk orientation on financing expectations in new venture creation: does sex matter?

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 2002. Disponível em: <www.babson.edu>. Accessed on: 05 Feb. 2012.

BIERNACKI, P., WALDORF, D. Snowball sampling: problems and techniques of chain referral sampling.

Sociological Methods & Research, [S. l.], v. 2, n. 2, p.141-163, Nov. 1981.BOOHENE, R.; SHERIDAN, A.; KOTEY,B. Gender, personal values, strategies and small business performance.

Equal Opportunities International, [S. l.], v. 27, n. 3, p. 237-257, 2008.BJÖRNSSON, B.; ABRAHA, D. Counselling encounters between banks and entrepreneurs: a gender perspective.

International Journal of Bank Marketing, Bradford, v. 23, n. 6, p. 444-463, 2005.

BOOHENE, R.; SHERIDAN, A.; KOTEY, B. Gender, personal values, strategies and small business performance.

Equal Opportunities International, [S. l.], v. 27, n. 3, p. 237-257, 2008.BOTHA, M.; NIEMAN, G.; VUUREN, J. Enhancing female entrepreneurship by enabling access to skills.

Entrepreneurship Management, [S. l.], v. 2, n. 4, p. 479-493, Dec. 2006.BRUIN, A.; FLINT-HARTLE, S. Entrepreneurial women and private capital: the New Zealand perspective.

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, [S. l.], v. 11, n. 2, p. 108-128, 2005.

BUTTNER, E. H.; ROSEN, B. Bank loan officers’ perceptions of the characteristics of men,

women, and successful entrepreneurs.

Journal of Business Venturing, Amsterdam, v. 3, n. 3, p. 249-258, Summer 1988. CANTZLER, I.; LEIJON, S. Team-oriented women entrepreneurs: a way to modern management.

Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Bradford, v. 14, n. seCARTER, N. M. The role of risk orientation on financing expectations in new venture creation: does sex matter?

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 2002. Disponível em: <www.babson.edu>. Accessed on: 05 Feb. 2012.

CARTER, S. The dynamics and performance of female-owned entrepreneurial firms.

Journal of Organizational Change Management. Bradford, v. 2, n. 3, p. 54-64, 1989 et al. Gender, entrepreneurship, and bank lending: the criteria and processes used by bank loan officers in assessing applications.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, [S. l.], v. 31, n. 3, p. 427-444, May 2007. CASSOL, N. K.; SILVEIRA, A.;

HOELTGEBAUM, M. Empreendedorismo feminino: análise da produção científica da base de

dados do Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), 1997-2006. In: ENCONTRO NACIONAL DA

ASSOCIAÇÃO DOS PROGRAMAS DE PÓS-GRADUAÇÃO EM ADMINISTRAÇÃO, 31., 2007. Salvador.

Anais Salvador: ANPAD, 2007. 1 CD-ROM.CHEW, I. K. H.; YAN, T. C. The changing pattern of women entrepreneurs: the Singapore experience.

Women in Management Review, Bradford, v. 6, n. 6, 1991. COLEMAN, S. Access to capital: a comparison of men and women.

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 1998. Available at: < http://www.babson.edu/entrep /fer/papers98/V/V_B/V_B.html>. Accessed on: Oct. 24 2007.COOK, R. G.; BELLIVEAU, P.; LENTZ, C.

The role of gender in US microenterprise business plan development, Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development,Bradford, v. 14, n. 2, p. 241-251, 2007.

CRAMER, L. et al. Representações femininas da ação empreendedora: uma análise da trajetória

das mulheres no mundo dos negócios. Revista de Empreendedorismo e Gestão de Pequenas

Empresas, São Paulo, v.1, n.1, 53-71, Jan./April, 2012.

CROMIE, S.; BIRLEY, S. Networking by female business owners in Northern Ireland.

Journal of Business Venturing, Amsterdam, v. 7, n. 3, p. 237-251, May 1992 DECARLO, J. F; LYONS, P. R. A comparison of selected personal characteristics of minority and non-minority female entrepreneurs.

Journal of Small Business Management, Morgantown, v. 17, n. 4, p. 222-229, Oct. 1979.DECHANT, K.; LAMKY, A. Toward an understanding of arab women entrepreneurs in Bahrain and Oman.

Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, Norfolk, v. 10, n. 2, p. 123–140, Aug. 2005. DE TIENNE, D. R.; CHANDLER, G. N. The role of gender in opportunity identification.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, [S. l.], v. 31, n. 3, p. 365-386, May 2007. DHALIWAL, S.; KANGIS, P. Asians in the

UK: gender, generations and enterprise.

Equal Opportunities International, Bradford, v. 25, n. 2, p. 92-108, 2006. DIAS, V. T. et al. A idealização da profissional adequada aos “novos tempos”. Anais Salvador: ANPAD, 2006. 1 CD-ROM.DIEGUES-CASTRILLON, M. I. et al. Turismo rural, empreendedorismo e gênero: um estudo do caso na comunidade autônoma da Galiza.

Revista de Sociologia e Economia Rural, Brasília, v. 50, n. 2, p. 371-382, Apr./Jun, 2012.

DOLINSKY, A. L.; CAPUTO, R. K.; PASUMARTY, K. Long-term entrepreneurship patterns: a national study of black and white female entry and stayer status differences.

Journal of Small Business Management. Morgantown, v. 32, n. 1, p. 18-26, Jan. 1994.

EDDLESTON, K. A.; POWELL, G. N.

The role of gender identity in explaining sex differences in business owners’ career satisfier references Journal of Business Venturing, Amsterdam, v. 23, n. 2, p. 244-256, Mar. 2008. FAGENSON, E. A. Personal value systems of men and women entrepreneurs versus managers.

Journal of Business Venturing, v. 8, n. 5, p. 409-430, Sept. 1993.FAIRLIE, R. W. Entrepreneurship and earnings among young adults from disadvantaged families.

Small Business Economics, Dordrecht, v. 25, n. 3, p. 223-236, Oct. 2005. FASCI, M. A.; VALDEZ, J. A performance contrast of male- and female-owned small accounting practices. Journal of Small Business Management, Morgantown, v. 36, n. 3, p. 1-7, July 1998.

FERREIRA, J. M.; GIMENEZ, F. A. P.; RAMOS, S. C. Potencial empreendedor e gênero: estudo com varejistas de materiais de Curitiba/PR.

In: ENCONTRO DE ESTUDOS SOBRE EMPREENDEDORISMO E GESTÃO DE PEQUENAS EMPRESAS, 4., 2005. Curitiba. Anais. Curitiba: UEL/UEM/PUC-PR/PPA, 2005. 1 CD-ROM. NOGUEIRA, E. E. S. Mulheres esuas histórias: razão, sensibilidade e subjetividade no empreendedorismo feminino.

Revista de Administração Contemporânea, Curitiba, v. 17, n. 4, p. 398-417, Jul./Aug. 2013.

FISCHER, E. M.; REUBER, A. R.; DYKE, L. S.

A theoretical overview and extension of research on sex, gender, and entrepreneurship.

Journal of Business Venturing, New York, v. 8, n. 2, p. 151-168, Mar. 1993.

FULLER-LOVE, N.; LIM, L.; AKEHURST, G. Guest editorial: female and ethnic minority entrepreneurship.

The International Entrepreneurship Management Journal, [S. l.], v. 2, n. 4, p. 429-439, Dec. 2006.

GATEWOOD, E. J. et al. Toward a theory of women entrepreneurship and venture capital.

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 2003. Available at: <http://www.babson.edu/entrep/fer/

BABSON2003>. Accessed on: Oct. 24 2007.GIMENEZ, F. A. P. et al.

Gênero Empreendedorismo: um estudo comparativo no Paraná. In: ENCONTRO DE ESTUDOS

SOBRE EMPREENDEDORISMO E GESTÃO DE PEQUENAS EMPRESAS, 1., 2000.

Anais Maringá: UEL/UEM/PPA, 2000. 1 CD-ROM.

GLOBAL ENTERPRENEURSHIP MONITOR (GEM) 2013a. Empreendedorismo no Brasil:

relatório executivo 2013. Available at: < http://ibqp.org.br/upload/tiny_mce/

Download/GEM_2013_-_Relatorio_executivo_Empreendedorismo_no_Brasil.pdf>. Accessed on:

06 Jun. 2014.

GLOBAL ENTREPRENEURSHIP MONITOR (GEM) 2013b. Empreendedorismo no Brasil

2013. Curitiba: IBQP, 2013. Available at: < http://www.ibqp.org.br/upload/tiny_mce/ GEM_2013_-_Livro_Empreendedorismo_no_ Brasil.pdf>. Accessed on: 06 Jun. 2014.

GODWIN, L. N.; STEVENS, C. E.; BRENNER, N. L. Forced to play by the rules? Theorizing

how mixed-sex founding teams benefit women entrepreneurs in male-dominated contexts.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice,[S. l.],v. 30, n. 5, p. 623-642, Sept. 2006.

GRAY, K. R.; FINLEY-HERVEY, J. Women and entrepreneurship in Morocco.

The International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, [S. l.], v. 1, n. 2, p. 203-217, 2005.

HARRISON, R. T.; MASON, C. M. Does gender matter? Women business angles and the supply

of entrepreneurial finance.

Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, [S. l.], v. 31, n. 5, p. 445-472, May 2007. HISRICH, R. D. et al. Performance in entrepreneurial ventures: does gender matter?.

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 1997. Available at: < http://www.babson.edu/ entrep/

fer/papers97/sum97/hisb.htm>. Accessed on: 23 Oct. 2007 BRUSH, C.

The woman entrepreneur: management skills and business problems BRUSH, C. G. Women entrepreneurs: a longitudinal study. In: VESPER, K. H. (Ed.).

Frontiers of entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Babson College, p. 187-199, 1987. FAN, Z. Women entrepreneurs in the people’s Republic of China: an exploratory study

Journal of Managerial Psychology, Bradford, v. 6, n. 3, p. 3-12, 1991.  O`BRIEN, M.

The woman entrepreneur from a business and sociological perspective. In: VESPER, K. H. (Ed.)

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Babson College, p. 21-39, 1981.

HOLMQUIST, C.; SUNDIN, E.

Women as entrepreneurs in Sweden: conclusions from a survey. In: VESPER, K. H. (Ed.)

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research. Wellesley, Massachusetts: Babson College, p. 626-642, 1989.

JONATHAN, E. G. Empreendedorismo feminino no setor tecnológico brasileiro: dificuldades e

tendências. In: ENCONTRO DE ESTUDOS SOBRE EMPREENDEDORISMO E GESTÃO

DE PEQUENAS EMPRESAS, 3., 2003. Brasília. Anais. Brasília: UEL/UEM/PPA/UnB, 2003. 1

CD-ROM.

Psicologia & Sociedade, Belo Horizonte, v. 19, n. 1, p. 77-84, Jan./Apr. 2007. JOOS, M. Women: the entrepreneurs of the 1980s. Reference Services Review, Bradford,v. 15, n. 3, p. 59-65, 1987.

KEPHART, P.; SCHUMACHER, L. Has the ‘glass ceiling’ cracked?: an exploration of women

entrepreneurship.

Journal of Leadership & Organizational Studies, [S. l.], v. 12, n. 1, p. 2-15, Fall 2005.

KIRKWOOD, J. Igniting the entrepreneurial spirit: is the role parents play gendered

International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behaviour & Research, [S. l.], v. 13, n. 1,p. 39-59, 2007.

KLYVER, K.; TERJESEN, S. Entrepreneurial network composition.

Women in Management Review, Bradford, v. 22, n. 8, p. 682-688, 2007.KYRO, P.

Women entrepreneurs question men’s criteria for success.

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 2001. Available at: <http://fusionmx.

babson.edu/entrep/fer/babson2001/IV/IVC/IVC.htm >. Acesso em: 23 out. 2007.

LEAHY, K. T.; EGGERS, J. H. Is gender still a factor in entrepreneurial leader behavior?

Frontiers of Entrepreneurship Research, 1998. Available at: <http://www.babson.edu/entrep/fer/

papers98/V/V_F/V_F_text.htm>. Accessed on: 23 Oct. 2007.

LEE-GOSSELIN, H.; GRISÉ J. Are women owner-managers challenging our definitions of

entrepreneurship? An in-depth survey.

Journal of Business Ethics, Dordrecht, v. 9, n. 4-5, p. 423-433, Apr./May 1990.

LERNER, M.; MENAHEM, G.; HISRICH, R. D. Does government matter? The impact of

occupational retraining, gender and ethnicity on immigrants’ incorporation.

Journal of Small Business and Enterprise Development, Bradford, v. 12, n. 2, p. 192-210, 2005.

LIMA, R. C. R.; FREITAS, A. A. F. Personalidade empreendedora, recursos pessoais, ambiente,

atividades organizacionais, gênero e desempenho financeiro de empreendedores informais.

Revista