An entrepreneur in the context of new challenges (using the example of the territories of the Republic of Belarus)
Автор: Kargapolova E.V., Lashuk I.V., Koshkin A.P.
Журнал: Economic and Social Changes: Facts, Trends, Forecast @volnc-esc-en
Рубрика: Science, technology and innovation development
Статья в выпуске: 6 т.16, 2023 года.
Бесплатный доступ
The aim of the work is to assess the activities of entrepreneurs in the regions of the Republic of Belarus affected by the Chernobyl disaster. We use statistical analysis and findings of sociological studies to assess entrepreneurial activity in the context of the following new challenges: the need to move to the sixth technological paradigm based on a highly competitive socio-economic system of a mixed type combining elements of state planning and market relations; preserving the social structure of the Belarusian society amid unprecedented wealth stratification in other countries; overcoming the consequences of man-made disasters. The empirical basis includes the data of sociological questionnaire surveys conducted in 2021 and 2022 by the Center for Social and Humanities Studies of the Belarus State Economic University in collaboration with the Institute of Sociology of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, within the framework of the research project “To carry out a sociological assessment of the entrepreneurial potential of the territories affected by the Chernobyl accident”. The findings of the research show considerable unity of moral and value priorities of entrepreneurs and the population. This reveals the degree of adaptability of the country’s socio-economic system to the challenges associated with the formation of a mixed economic model, in which elements of market management are new to Belarusians. We prove that entrepreneurs can be the vanguard of a mixed economy as the most competitive type for Belarus to shift to a society of the sixth technological paradigm, since they have qualities adequate to modern challenges: self-reliance, relying on one’s own capabilities, competencies, what everyone can do personally, on their own. One of the main advantages of business activity in Belarus is the low degree of cronyism, which helps to avoid the challenges of oligarchic capitalism and related unprecedented social stratification on a material basis. It is shown that entrepreneurs adequately assess the conditions for a successful start in various business areas. To a greater extent, a request has been formed to launch a business in the service sector, followed by the areas of specialized services - legal, medical spheres, production of goods, processing of products.
Entrepreneur, business entities, mixed economy, emergency situation, territories affected by radionuclide contamination
Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/147242463
IDR: 147242463 | DOI: 10.15838/esc.2023.6.90.8
Список литературы An entrepreneur in the context of new challenges (using the example of the territories of the Republic of Belarus)
- Antonenko I.V., Karitskii I.N. (2011). The entrepreneur as a passionary, cultural tradition and technological breakthrough. Chelovecheskii Faktor: Sotsial’nyi Psikholog, 1(21), 64–74 (in Russian).
- Berezentseva T.N. (2011). Historical evolution of the concepts of “entrepreneurship” and “entrepreneur”. Vestnik Moskovskogo gosudarstvennogo otkrytogo universiteta. Moskva. Seriya: Ekonomika i pravo=Bulletin of the Moscow State Open University, 3, 42–47 (in Russian).
- Bobrov V.V. et al. (2006). Energetika Belarusi: Sostoyanie. Problemy. Perspektivy: monografiya [Energy Sector in Belarus: Status. Problems. Prospects: Monograph]. Minsk: FU Aniform.
- Brooks S., Kumar A. (2023). Why the super-rich will not be saving the world: Philanthropy and “privatization creep” in global development. Business & Society, 62(2), 223–228. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503211053608
- Bubnovskaya O.V., Leonidova V.V. (2021). Entrepreneur: Personality profile and career preferences. Izvestiya Dal’nevostochnogo federal’nogo universiteta. Ekonomika i upravlenie=The Bulletin of the Far Eastern Federal University. Economics and Management, 4(100), 5–18 (in Russian).
- Ermakov V.V., Nugumanov M.R. (2013). Features of Russian economic thought in understanding the content of the categories “entrepreneur” and “entrepreneurship”. Kazanskaya nauka=Kazan Science, 2, 25–28 (in Russian).
- Garnova Ya.Yu. (2019). Is the 21st century entrepreneur ethical? Aktual’nye problemy i perspektivy razvitiya ekonomiki: rossiiskii i zarubezhnyi opyt, 21, 147–149 (in Russian).
- Glaz’ev S.Yu. (2022). Noonomy as a managing paradigm of the new world economic order. Noonomika i nooobshchestvo. Al’manakh trudov INIR im. S.Yu. Vitte=Almanac of Scientific Works of the S.Y. Witte INID, 1, 3, 48–58 (in Russian).
- Grazhdankina O.A., Grazhdankin V.A., Kirkeeva L.I. (2012). Transformation of theoretical component of “entrepreneur” concept. Vestnik Altaiskogo gosudarstvennogo agrarnogo universiteta=Bulletin of Altai State Agricultural University, 3(89), 114–118 (in Russian).
- Halkos G., Managi Sh., Tzeremes N. (2015). The effect of natural and man-made disasters on countries’ production efficiency. Journal of Economic Structures, 4, 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-015-0019-2
- Hassan S.S., Meisner K., Krause K. et al. (2023). Is digitalization a source of innovation? Exploring the role of digital diffusion in SME innovation performance. Small Business Economics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-023-00826-7
- Haurylik O. N. (2020). On some peculiarities of the monetary thinking of the population. In: Sotsiologicheskii al’manakh. Vyp. 11. [Sociological Almanac. Issue. 11]. Minsk: Belaruskaya nauka.
- Ibrahimova G., Moog P. (2023). Colonialism versus independence – the role of entrepreneurial ecosystems in Azerbaijan over time. Small Business Economics, 61, 1289–1336. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-022-00725-3
- Ivashkin I.F., Fol’k O.V. (2015). On the question of distinguishing the concepts of “entrepreneur” and “capitalist” in the context of modern methodological culture. Ceteris Paribus, 1, 51–54 (in Russian).
- Joseph J., Katsos J.E., van Buren H.J. (2023). Entrepreneurship and Peacebuilding: A review and synthesis. Business & Society, 62(2), 322–362. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/00076503221084638
- Marchenko T.A., Mel’nitskaya T.B., Apanasyuk O.N. (2014). Information-psychological protection of the population living in radioactively contaminated territories: Principles, methods, experience. Tekhnologii grazhdanskoi bezopasnosti=Civil SecurityTechnology, 2(40), 50–56 (in Russian).
- Nureev P.M. (2003). The Schumpeterian entrepreneur in theory and practice. Ekonomicheskii vestnik Rostovskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta=Vestnik of Rostov State Economic University, 1(4), 31–47 (in Russian).
- Paevskaya S.L. (2016). A system analysis of different theories of the origin of the terms “entrepreneurship” and “entrepreneur”. Sotsial’no-ekonomicheskie issledovaniya, gumanitarnye nauki i yurisprudentsiya: teoriya i praktika=Socio-economic Studies, Humanities and Law: Theory and Practice, 6, 22–30 (in Russian).
- Pin’kovetskaya Yu.S. (2020). Definitions of “entrepreneur” and “entrepreneurship”: Review of research by foreign scientists. Upravlenie v sovremennykh sistemakh, 2(26), 34–41 (in Russian).
- Pozhueva T.A., Lebedeva O.M. (2011). Innovation activity – the basis for effective entrepreneurship. Vestnik ekonomicheskoi nauki Ukrainy, 1(19), 117–119 (in Russian).
- Shavel’ S.A. (2014). Factors influencing public opinion on the construction of the Belarusian NPP. In: Sotsiologicheskii al’manakh. Vyp. 5. [Sociological Almanac. Issue. 5]. Minsk: Belaruskaya nauka.
- Shavel’ S.A. et al. (2020). Neekonomicheskie faktory ustoichivogo razvitiya obshchestva [Non-Economic Factors of Sustainable Development of Society]. Minsk: Belaruskaya navuka.
- Singh R.P. (2020). Overconfidence: A common psychological attribute of entrepreneurs which leads to firm failure. New England Journal of Entrepreneurship, 23(1), 25–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/NEJE-07-2019-0031
- Smirnov V.E. (2021). Administrative and managerial barriers to the development of entrepreneurial activity. In: Sotsiologicheskii al’manakh. Vyp. 12. [Sociological Almanac. Issue. 12]. Minsk: Belaruskaya nauka.
- Smirnova R.A. (2021). Sociological monitoring and analysis of economic barriers to entrepreneurship development in Belarus. In: Sotsiologicheskii al’manakh. Vyp. 12. [Sociological Almanac. Issue. 12]. Minsk: Belaruskaya nauka.
- Smirnova R.A. (2020). Cluster interactions of small and medium-sized enterprises in Belarus: Sociological analysis. In: Sotsiologicheskii al’manakh. Vyp. 11. [Sociological Almanac. Issue. 11]. Minsk: Belaruskaya nauka.
- Spirina A.S. (2016). Entrepreneur as a potential representative of the middle class. Sotsiologiya v sovremennom mire: nauka, obrazovanie, tvorchestvo=Sociology in the modern world: science, education, creativity, 8–2, 292–294 (in Russian).
- Svetun’kov M.G. (2010). On the issue of the definition of the concept of “entrepreneur”. Vestnik Ekaterininskogo instituta, 4(12), 43–45 (in Russian).
- Tolkachev P.A. (2019). Entrepreneur or bourgeois: In search of rents. Lichnost’. Kul’tura. Obshchestvo=Personality. Culture. Society, 21, 3–4 (103–104), 198–206 (in Russian).
- Vakhitova Z.T. (2015). Theoretical approaches to the concept of “business” and “entrepreneur”. Simvol nauki: mezhdunarodnyi nauchnyi zhurnal=International Scientific Journal Symbol of Science, 9–1, 130–131 (in Russian).
- Vishnyakova M.V. (2022). Employment of Graduates in Radionuclide-Contaminated Areas (Based on Sociological Research). Vesnik belaruskaga dzyarzhaunaga ekanamichnaga universiteta=Belarusian State Economic University Bulletin, 1(150), 119–126 (in Russian).
