Annotated Bibliography

ENTREPRENEURIAL DRIVE AND THE INFORMAL ECONOMY IN CAMEROON

CHRISTOPHER F. ACHUA

University of Virginia, College at Wise Department of Business and Economics

Wise, VA 24293 [email protected]

ROBERT N. LUSSIER

Springfield College, Springfield, MA 01109

Received July 2014 Revised November 2014 Published December 2014

There is a growing appreciation for the value and impact of the informal economy on the lives and livelihood of many in developing economies. A key question for researchers has been whether those operating in it do so out of necessity or voluntarily as opportunity seekers? Unlike previous studies that have examined the informal economy as one large block, this paper took a slightly different tangent. First, we analyzed and identified three distinct sub-groups within the informal entrepreneurial sector — the street walker (st. walker), the street corner (st. corner) and store owner (st. owner) — and then examined each group’s motives. Reporting the results of face-to-face structured interviews with 200 informal entrepreneurs in Cameroon (West Africa), the finding is that the majority, especially st. walker and st. corner informal entrepreneurs, are predominantly necessity-driven while st. owner entrepreneurs are predominantly opportunity-driven. Our study also revealed a progression pattern whereby st. walkers do progress to st. corner and ultimately to st. owner entrepreneurs. The as- sumption is that this does create a learning curve effect in the entrepreneurial abilities and effectiveness of store owners. This is an area for future research. There are policy implications for institutional support that can grow the informal economy into the formal economy.

Keywords: Entrepreneurship; informal economy; necessity-driven motive; opportunity-driven motive; West Africa; Cameroon.

1. Introduction

Despite its riches in precious minerals and natural resources, most of Africa is a continent rife with conflict, poverty, corruption, hunger and disease. Yet, out of this miserable state, many Africans have learned to be self-reliant — making lemonade from lemons. The lemonade represents the creative means by which Africans have engaged in and are succeeding in micro-level entrepreneurial activities known as the informal economy. The informal economy refers to the paid production and sale of goods and services that are unregistered by, or hidden from the state for tax and/or benefit purposes but which are

Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship Vol. 19, No. 4 (2014) 1450024 (12 pages) © World Scientific Publishing Company DOI: 10.1142/S1084946714500241

1450024-1

legal in all other respects (Bruton et al., 2012; Webb et al., 2013; Nichter and Goldmark, 2009; McGahan, 2012; Williams, 2006). Those operating in it do so under the radar of government scrutiny or regulation. They are not counted as part of the formal economy. It is important to point out that paid work in which the good and/or service itself is illegal (e.g., drug trafficking) is excluded, as is unpaid work. There is an assumption that many who operate in the informal economy do so because of the burdening bureaucratic business environment and the excessively complicated registration and tax systems for private enterprise in many African countries (Williams, 2013). To go around these roadblocks, many small entrepreneurs have found ingenious ways to operate outside the formal economic system (Commander et al., 2013). According to one author, it is this “rule-breaking ethos” that is expanding the informal economy throughout Africa (Olopade, 2014).

There is a growing appreciation for the value and impact of this “hidden enterprise” culture on the lives and livelihood of those participating in it (Bruton et al., 2012; Williams, 2006). There is increasing evidence that the informal economy is a fast growing and impactful sector in the workforce of many developing economies. For example, the International Labor Organization (ILO) reports that the informal economy’s share of the nonagricultural workforce is 55 percent in Latin America, 45 to 85 percent in Asia and approximately 80 percent in Africa (ILO, 2004). In developing countries, the informal economy is synonymous with self-employment. USAID estimates that self-employment represents 70 percent of informal employment in sub-Saharan Africa, 59 percent in Asia and 60 percent in Latin America (USAID, 2006). In terms of its contribution to the GDP, it is estimated that informal firms accounted for $70 billion of GDP in Africa, $531 billion in Asia and $353 billion in Latin America (Schneider, 2000). The ILO has come to view the informal economy as “an incubator for business potential and. . .transitional base for accessibility and graduation to the formal economy.” The ILO maintains that these workers show “real business acumen, creativity, dynamism and innovation” (ILO, 2002a).

The central question for researchers has been whether those operating in the informal economy do so out of necessity (push factors) or voluntarily as opportunity seekers (pull factors)? In other words, are they necessity or opportunity-driven entrepreneurs? The necessity-driven entrepreneurs are perceived as poor, uneducated, not very business- savvy and thus, less likely to be successful as entrepreneurs. Their decision to launch a business enterprise is more serendipitous or impulse-driven. Opportunity-driven entre- preneurs are seen as more marketing oriented, educated and more likely to succeed in their business ventures. The opportunity-driven entrepreneur thinks ahead, plans and executes with a greater sense of purpose. The prevailing view has been that all or most informal entrepreneurs in developing economies do so out of necessity (pushed into it). Given the expanding size of the informal economy and its impact on the lives of most people in developing countries, it is imperative to test these assumptions (Brock et al., 2014).

There is growing recognition that despite its importance, the informal economy has attracted relatively little scholarly attention. However, this is changing as evidenced by the

C. F. Achua & R. N. Lussier

1450024-2

fact that in 2012, the Academy of Management highlighted the informal economy as the theme for its annual meeting. Some scholars have gone as far as calling it the final frontier of the management domain (Bruton et al., 2013). In response to the Academy’s call, studies focusing in this area have begun to emerge. However, most of the research on the informal economy has focused on “opportunity-driven” entrepreneurs in advanced western economies or the post-socialist transition economies in Asia. Little has been published on the informal economy in developing economies (Bruton et al., 2012), especially in relation to Africa (Jackson, 2012; Odom and Williams, 2012). Odom and Williams (2012) evaluated informal entrepreneurs’ motives in the sub-Saharan African country of Ghana and recommended further research to determine whether informal entrepreneurs’ motives display the same co-presence of push and pull factors and dyna- mism elsewhere. Our study analyzes informal entrepreneurs’ motives in Cameroon (West Africa).

2. Literature Review

Historically, the nature of the informal economy has always been that entrepreneurs operating in the informal economy, especially in developing economies, do so out of economic necessity as a survival strategy (Cross, 1997; McElwee, 2009). However, there is another school of thought that many entrepreneurs working full- or part-time in the informal economy do so out of choice, such as the desire for independence or to own a business (Aidis et al., 2006; Minniti et al., 2006). In other words, their decision is more opportunity-driven than necessity-driven. This is very much the case for studies of entrepreneurial motives from developed economies where those who choose to participate in the informal economy do so because they find more autonomy, flexibility and freedom. However, rather than focusing on the opportunity and necessity-drivers in the motives of individual informal entrepreneurs as mutually exclusive choices, some scholars argue that both necessity and opportunity can be co-present in the rationales of individual informal entrepreneurs and also that the drivers underpinning informal entrepreneurship can change over time, often from more necessity- to opportunity-driven (Williams, 2007, 2008, 2009; Williams et al., 2009). According to Odom and Williams (2012), the clear implication is that it would be mistaken for economic and enterprise development practitioners to write- off necessity entrepreneurs operating informally as unworthy of support. They argue that successful necessity-driven entrepreneurs do go on to become more opportunity-driven over time. As mentioned in the introduction, this tendency to write-off necessity-driven entrepreneurs is because of the perception that they are uneducated, poorly financed and less likely to succeed in their entrepreneurial endeavors (Williams, 2013).

A closer look at the structural makeup of the informal economy in developing countries reveals three layers or categories of retail entrepreneurs: street walker, the street corner and store owner.

. The st. walkers, also known as street hawkers, have no fixed location. They carry their wares with them everywhere along city and neighborhood streets.

Entrepreneurial Drive and the Informal Economy in Cameroon

1450024-3

. The st. corner retailers are those who have a temporary location on the street (a kiosk or wooden stand) with a few more items displayed for sale. They can change location instantly when necessary.

. The st. owner is one who has earned enough capital to be able to afford a permanent store-front location along the urban streets or in a designated market center.

The st. walker, st. corner and st. owner entrepreneurs in third world economies have always been perceived as driven out of necessity into such endeavors as a last resort (Gallin, 2001) and represented as “involuntary,” “forced,” “reluctant” or “survivalist” (Hughes, 2006; Singh and De Noble, 2003; Travers, 2002). The transition from st. walker to st. corner to st. owner supports the proposition by some that the drivers underpinning informal entrepreneurship can change over time, often from more necessity- to opportunity-driven.

The literature on entrepreneurship in Ghana depicts such entrepreneurs as necessity- driven and doing so because there are limited opportunities available elsewhere in the country. Necessity-driven entrepreneurs are described as being in it to make a living and provide for their family. It is “living maximization” rather than “profit maximization” (Odom and Williams, 2012). However, in Cameroon there is evidence to support a co- presence of both necessity and opportunity-driven motives among informal entrepreneurs. For example, there are tribes that are well known for their entrepreneurial inclination. In the western region of Cameroon, the Bablilkeahs are well known for their entrepreneurial dominance in the informal economy. There is a cultural orientation toward entre- preneurship that is not forced or done out of necessity. Similarly, the Kwahus from the eastern region of Ghana have been depicted as “born” entrepreneurs. With limited formal education and little training in entrepreneurship, they have been portrayed as the most successful entrepreneurs in Ghana and doing so out of choice (Hung Manh et al., 2007).

Informal entrepreneurs are predominantly retailers who sell consumer goods such as shoes, clothing, cosmetics, jewelry, medicine, books, electronics, artworks and food. Some are specialized and others act like general stores. On the streets of any urban city in Africa, shoppers encounter street vendors, some walking with their wares on them (st. walkers) and others seated on street corners with their merchandise on temporary stands next to them (st. corner). Their knowledge of the marketing concept is limited or non-existent.

In marketing strategy planning, experts generally agree that success depends on finding attractive opportunities and developing profitable marketing strategies to exploit them. Therefore, an effective marketing strategy consist of two inter-related parts: a target market, which represents a fairly homogeneous (similar) group of customers to whom an entrepreneurs wishes to appeal and a marketing mix, which represents the product, pro- motion, place/location and price (4Ps) variables an entrepreneur puts together to satisfy the target market (Perreault et al., 2013). There is an assumption that necessity-driven in- formal entrepreneurs in developing nations like Cameroon do not understand this concept at all. In most cases, the decisions surrounding this marketing construct are based on intuition and very little research or thought process put in it. The only strategic decision informal entrepreneurs seemed to have consciously made is what product/service offering to put out in the market place.

C. F. Achua & R. N. Lussier

1450024-4

In Cameroon, we observed that st. walker and st. corner entrepreneurs displayed the following product/service offerings: they were either selling (1) a single product (e.g. just shoes), (2) a related product line (shoes, socks, pants, shirts), (3) unrelated product lines (shoes, art work, cosmetics, medicine, electronics), (4) ready-to-eat meal(s) and (5) ser- vices (hair braiding, transportation, repairs, palm reading, etc.).

As mentioned above, the st. owner entrepreneur is someone who has made a strategic decision to have a permanent location in a commercial district, central market or resi- dential neighborhood. It is assumed they are more opportunity-driven. In Cameroon, we observed store ownership that could be described as: (1) a neighborhood convenient store (like the 7-Elevens), (2) restaurant, (3) neighborhood pub (beverages–alcohol and non- alcohol), (4) food store (like super-markets), (5) department store (selling non-food items) (6) service (offering hair braiding/styling, transportation, repairs, phone booth, etc.) and (7) producer/manufacturer (design and produce artwork, furniture, coffins, metal work, clothing).

It is plausible to assume that the only marketing strategy decisions informal entrepreneurs show some cognitive engagement with are the product and place/loca- tions elements. There is little evidence of any cognitive process involving promotion and pricing. In most developing economies (like Cameroon), promotion by formal or informal entrepreneurs is still in its infancy and marketing exchange is based on a flexible pricing policy. A flexible pricing policy means offering the same product and quantities to different customers at different prices. It is the opposite of the one-price- policy most buyer-seller exchanges in developed economies employ (Perreault et al., 2013). Because the st. owner entrepreneur is at a fixed location, they pay taxes, license fees, rents and other dues the street vendors avoid. The progression from a st. walker or st. corner to a st. owner entrepreneur is a transition from the informal to the formal economy that needs further exploration. From this discussion, we put forth the fol- lowing hypotheses:

Hypothesis 1: The majority of informal entrepreneurs are necessity-based rather than opportunity based.

Hypothesis 2: St. walker and st. corner entrepreneurs are more likely to identify as necessity-driven rather than opportunity-driven.

Hypothesis 3: St. owner entrepreneurs are more likely to identify as opportunity-driven rather than necessity-driven.

Hypothesis 4: Successful st. walker entrepreneurs go on to become st. corner entrepreneurs.

Hypothesis 5: Successful st. owner entrepreneurs had prior experience as st. walkers and/ or st. corner businesses.

3. Methodology

The methodology is survey research with personal interviews. A nation of 25 million people, Cameroon is located on the central western part of Africa. Our survey targeted

Entrepreneurial Drive and the Informal Economy in Cameroon

1450024-5

informal entrepreneurs in Bamenda, which is a city in northwestern Cameroon and capital of the northwest region. The city has a population of about 500,000 people and is located 366 kilometres (227 miles) north-west of the Cameroonian capital, Yaounde. Within the Bamenda urban community, we employed maximum variation sampling to identify four key locations where informal entrepreneurs concentrated. The locations consisted of (1) the main streets in the city center, (2) the entrances to the main market, (3) inside the main market and (4) residential neighborhoods. Through a random process, we sampled 50 individual entrepreneurs from each location, which resulted in a total of 200 completed questionnaires. The randomness was in the sense that we invited informal entrepreneurs who happened to be present at a particular location on a given day and time to participate in the survey.

We set out to complete 250 questionnaires. However, roughly one of every five persons invited to participate turned us down. At the end, we completed 217 questionnaires and seventeen were rejected for improper or missing data. Therefore, we had a response rate of 80 percent.

All the interviews were conducted face-to-face using a structured questionnaire with fifteen close-ended questions. The first four questions directly address the focus of this paper. First, we asked whether the primary reason for starting the business was necessity or opportunity-driven? Second, we asked what type of entrepreneur (st. walker, st. corner or st. owner) they are; what type(s) of products/services they are selling and how many years they have been in business. Note that we used the five product/service offering and the seven store-type categorizations described in the literature review to structure this question and the responses. The third and fourth questions addressed the progression from st. walker to st. corner to st. owner entrepreneur. We also gathered demographic data on respondents’ gender, age, education and family status (do they work with family members, non-family members or alone?).

4. Results and Discussion

4.1. Descriptive statistics

Of the 200 respondents, 107 (53.5%) were males and 93 (46.5%) were female. The average age of respondents was 35.08 with a standard deviation of 11.91. When it comes to working with or without assistance, 129 (64.5%) work solo, 51 (25.5%) have assistance from a family member, 4 (2%) have assistance from a non-family member and 16 (8%) have both family and non-family members assisting in the business. See Table 1 for the

Table 1. Type of informal entrepreneurs.

Frequency Percent

Street-Walker 54 27 Street-Corner 92 46 Store-Owner 54 27 Total 200 100

C. F. Achua & R. N. Lussier

1450024-6

frequencies and percentages of the types of entrepreneurs: 27 percent of entrepreneurs identified as st. walkers, 46 percent as st. corner entrepreneurs and 27 percent as st. owners.

4.2. Test of hypothesis 1

The first hypothesis stated that the majority of informal entrepreneurs are necessity-driven rather than opportunity-driven. The intent here is to test the historical assumption that informal entrepreneurs in third world nations are primarily necessity-driven. It is the case that in developing countries like Cameroon, informal entrepreneurs (like st. walkers and st. corner entrepreneurs) are perceived as individuals from socially and economically dis- advantaged backgrounds who seek employment in the informal economy out of necessity not as a choice. To these populations, the informal economy is a last resort in the absence of alternative sources of employment (Hanson, 2005; Palmer, 2007). However, as Odom and Williams (2012) found, informal entrepreneurs in developing economies like Ghana sometimes start their own micro enterprises out of choice. As mentioned earlier, previous studies on the necessity/opportunity-drive question had been confined to the advanced economies in the West and a few Latin American nations (Perry and Maloney, 2007). Therefore, hypothesis 1 was intended to test this assumption in the Cameroon context. Let’s examine the data.

As Table 2 reveals, two-thirds (64.5%) of informal entrepreneurs went into business out of necessity while one-third (35.5%) cited opportunity as their motive. Necessity- driven entrepreneurs are pushed into entrepreneurship as a last resort while opportunity- driven entrepreneurs are pulled into entrepreneurship because they see an unmet need in the market and want to take advantage of it. Also, they desire the independence of owning their own business. Therefore, the hypothesis that the majority of informal entrepreneurs are necessity-driven rather than opportunity-driven is strongly supported by one-sample binomial testing (p ¼ 0:000). Also noteworthy is the fact that more informal entrepreneurs (35%) in Bamenda (Cameroon) cited the opportunity motive compared to a lesser number (less than 25%) in the Kofuridua (Ghana) study.

4.3. Test of hypothesis 2

The second hypothesis stated that st. walker and st. corner entrepreneurs are more likely to identify as necessity-driven rather than opportunity-driven. As revealed in Table 3, 89

Table 2. Primary reason for starting a business in informal economy by Bamenda entrepreneurs.

Frequency Percent p-Value

Necessity 129 64.5 Opportunity 71 35.5 Total 200 100 0.000

Entrepreneurial Drive and the Informal Economy in Cameroon

1450024-7

percent of st. walkers and 71 percent of st. corner entrepreneurs identified with the ne- cessity or push motive for starting their businesses. Therefore, the hypothesis is supported by chi-square testing (p ¼ 000).

4.4. Test of hypothesis 3

Hypothesis 3 stated that st. owner entrepreneurs are more likely to identify as opportunity- driven rather than necessity-driven. As shown in Table 3 above, 70 percent of st. owners identified with the opportunity or pull motive for starting their businesses while 30 percent cited with the necessity or pull motive. Therefore, the hypothesis is supported through chi- square testing (p ¼ 0:000).

In their study, Odom and Williams (2012) found that a vast majority (70%) of informal entrepreneurs tend to cite both necessity- and opportunity-drivers when explaining their rationales for participating in informal entrepreneurship. We found similar results. As a result, Odom and Williams (2012) cautioned that the tendency by some to want to squeeze all informal entrepreneurs into one side or the other of the necessity/opportunity dichot- omy is misleading and should be avoided.

4.5. Test of hypothesis 4

Hypothesis 4 stated that successful st. walker entrepreneurs go on to become st. corner entrepreneurs. Let’s examine the data in Table 4.

As seen in Table 4 above, the majority of st. corner informal entrepreneurs started out as st. walker entrepreneurs (60%) while 40 percent started out as st. corner informal entrepreneurs. Although more st. walker informal entrepreneurs did progress into st. corner informal entrepreneurs, it was not a significant number compared to those who started out as st. corner informal entrepreneurs by chi-square testing at the 0.05 level, but it is at the 0.10 level of significance (p ¼ 0:097).

Table 3. Reason for starting a business by type of informal entrepreneur.

St. Walker n and % St. Corner n and % St. Owner n and % p-Value

Necessity 48/89% 65/71% 16/30% Opportunity 6/11% 27/29% 38/70% Total 54/100% 92/100% 54/100% 0.000

Table 4. St. corner informal entrepreneurs — Progression patterns.

Frequency Percent p-Value

Started as st. walker 55 60% Started as st. corner 38 40% Total st. walker 92 0.097

C. F. Achua & R. N. Lussier

1450024-8

4.6. Test of hypothesis 5

Hypothesis 5 stated that successful st. owner entrepreneurs had prior experience as st. walkers and/or st. corner businesses.

Looking at st. owner entrepreneurs’ progression patterns (Table 5), we see the fol- lowing patterns: only 3.7 percent of st. owners said they started as st. walkers, 24.1 percent said they started as st. corner entrepreneurs, 35.2 percent said they progressed from st. walker to st. corner and then to st. owner entrepreneurs and 37.0 percent said they started right off as st. owners. What this reveals is that the majority of st. owner entre- preneurs had some experience as informal entrepreneurs at the st. walker or st. corner level. In fact 35.2 percent went through the cycle from st. walker to st. corner to st. owner and 24.1 percent went from st. corner to st. owner, skipping the st. walker phase. This means that combined, 63 percent of st. owners had some previous experience as informal entrepreneurs at the st. walker and st. corner levels. Thus, hypotheses 5 is supported by chi-square testing (p ¼ 0:002). It is possible that the experiences gained from previous phases carried over.

5. Conclusion and Implications

The objective of this study was to determine whether informal entrepreneurs’ motives display the same co-presence of push (necessity-driven) and pull (opportunity-driven) factors and dynamism in Cameroon, West Africa like in other studies. It is the first study to break down the informal entrepreneurial sector into three sub-groups. On the key question of what the primary reason is for starting a business in the informal economy, we found similar results with the Ghanian study. The majority of informal entrepreneurs in our study (64.5%) are predominantly necessity-driven and only a minority (35.5%) are opportunity-driven.

Focusing on the three sub-groups of the informal economy in Cameroon, this study found that more st. walker and st. corner entrepreneurs identified with the necessity-driven (push) motive than st. owner entrepreneurs. More st. owners identified with the oppor- tunity-driven (pull) motive for starting their businesses. This is understandable given that store ownership in many developing economies is a major decision that requires more capital and other resources to be put at risk. There is a deeper analytical process (or so it is assumed) that goes into opening a store than hawking a few items on the streets. As mentioned before, a successful marketing strategy specifies a target market and a related

Table 5. St. owner informal entrepreneurs — Progression patterns.

Frequency Percent Cumulative Percent p-Value

From st. walker to st. owner 2 3.7 3.7 From st. corner to st. owner 13 24.1 27.8 St. walker to st. corner to st. owner 19 35.2 63.0 100% Started as st. owner 20 37.0 37% Total 54 100.0 0.002

Entrepreneurial Drive and the Informal Economy in Cameroon

1450024-9

marketing mix — product, promotion, place/location and price — also referred to as the “4 Ps”. These 4Ps represent the variables the marketer or entrepreneur puts together to satisfy the need(s) of the target market. The st. owner entrepreneur is more likely to employ this marketing construct than the st. walker or st. corner entrepreneur, which supports why they display a greater level of the opportunity-driven motive. This is con- sistent with a previous study’s finding that many informal entrepreneurs, to varying degrees, are not only partially or fully opportunity-driven but that push and pull factors are co-present in their rationales for participating in informal entrepreneurship (Odom and Williams, 2012). In this study, we have been able to identify the group most likely to exhibit this characteristic, which will be the st. owners.

As mentioned earlier, the ILO has come to view the informal economy as “an incubator for business potential and. . .transitional base for accessibility and graduation to the formal economy” (ILO, 2002a). We found this to be the case as we saw the progression pattern from st. walker to st. corner and ultimately to st. owner. We found that more than half (63%) of st. owners had some previous experience as informal entrepreneurs operating as st. walker or st. corner entrepreneurs.

These findings have important public policy implications. African governments must realize the significant role the informal economy has on the livelihood of their citizens. Although it is precarious employment, the informal sector is what most people (young and old, male or female) in developing countries have come to rely upon. As Lydia Polgreen (deputy international editor at The Times and a former correspondent in western and southern Africa) appropriately states, the steel mills, auto and textile factories that built middle class societies from Europe to the United States and now in parts of Asia are nowhere on the horizon in most of Africa. Public policies that support and nurture informal entrepreneurs at the local level would be mutually beneficial given that more than half (64.5%) of those who start-out as necessity-driven entrepreneurs progress into opportu- nity-driven entrepreneurs and become part of the formal economy. This will be a win-win for both sides. At the national level, educational policies that incorporate entrepreneurial teachings early in the educational process can be very helpful for future or prospective entrepreneurs.

In conclusion, a major contribution of this study to the literature and public policy is that there is research support for the evolutionary process of many entrepreneurs going from st. walker to st. corner and ultimately to st. owner. More than half of necessity-driven informal entrepreneurs progress onto becoming opportunity-driven entrepreneurs, or their motives shift over time. This implies the need for public policy changes to support in- formal economy entrepreneurs, rather than continue to ignore them as most governments have conventionally done, as they do in fact contribute to the formal economy and many become opportunity-driven as part of the formal economy.

For future research, the learning curve effect that is assumed in the transition from st. walker to st. corner and ultimately to st. owner needs to be further explored. Also, future research should focus on the issues of funding. What funding sources are informal entrepreneurs utilizing, if any? Finally, how success is measured in a sector that operates under the radar and what factors determine success should be studied?

C. F. Achua & R. N. Lussier

1450024-10

We acknowledge that a weakness of our study is the sampling methodology we used. It was more of a convenient than a truly representative statistical sample. Also, although a face-to-face survey allows room for clarifications when need be, it can also encourage over or under reporting of sensitive data items like age, education level or business performance.

References

Aidis, R, F Welter, D Smallbone and N Isakova (2006). Female entrepreneurship in transition economies: The case of Lithuania and Ukraine. Feminist Economics, 13(2), 157–83.

Brock, G, T Jie and R Yarbrough (2014). The informal economy of Veracruz state during the Fox administration. Journal of Developing Areas, 48(2), 153–68.

Bruton, GD, R Ireland and DJ Ketchen Jr (2012). Toward a research agenda on the informal economy. Academy Of Management Perspectives, 26(3), 1–11.

Commander, S, N Isachenkova and Y Rodionova (2013). Informal employment dynamics in Ukraine: An analytical model of informality in transition economies. International Labor Review, 152(3/4), 445–67.

Cross, JC (1997). Entrepreneurship and exploitation: Measuring independence and dependence in the informal economy. International Journal of Sociology and Social Planning, 17(3/4), 37–63.

Gallin, D (2001). Propositions on trade unions and informal employment in time of globalization. Antipode, 19(4), 531–49.

Hanson, KT (2005). Landscape of survival and escape: Social networking in urban livelihoods in Ghana. Environment and Planning, 37, 1291–310.

Hughes, K (2006). Exploring motivations and success among Canadian women entrepreneurs. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 19(2), 107–20.

Hung Manh, C, C Benzing and C Mcgee (2007). Ghanaian and Kenyan entrepreneurs: A compar- ative analysis of their motivations, success characteristics and problems. Journal of Devel- opmental Entrepreneurship, 12(3), 295–322.

International Labor Organization (2004). A fair globalization: Creating opportunities for all. Geneva: International Labor Organization.

––– (2002a). Effect to be given to resolutions adopted by the International Labor Conference at its 90th Session.

––– (2002b). Resolution concerning decent work and 25 the informal economy: Governing Body, 285th Session, Seventh item on the agenda. Geneva, doc GB.285/7/2.

Jackson, T (2012). Cross-cultural management and the informal economy in sub-Saharan Africa: Implications for organization, employment and skills development. International Journal of Human Resource Management, 23(14).

McElwee, G (2009). The ethics of exploring entrepreneurship beyond the boundaries. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 22(1), 3–4.

McGahan, AM (2012). Challenges of the informal economy for the field of management. Academy of Management Perspectives, 26(3), 12–21.

Minniti, M, W Bygrave and E Autio (2006). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2005 Executive Report. London: London Business School.

Nichter, S and L Goldmark (2009). Small firm growth in developing markets. World Development, 37(9), 1453–64.

Odom, K and CC Williams (2012). Evaluating the motives of informal entrepreneurs in Koforidua, Ghana. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 17(1) 1250005 (17 pages).

Olopade, D (2014). The Bright Continent: Breaking Rules and Making Changes in Modern Africa. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

Entrepreneurial Drive and the Informal Economy in Cameroon

1450024-11

Palmer, R (2007). Skills for work? From skills development to decent livelihoods in Ghana’s rural informal economy. International Journal of Educational Development, 27, 397–420.

Perreault, WD, JP Cannon and EJ McCarthy (2013). Essentials of Marketing, 13th edn. New York: McGraw-Hill Irwin Publishing.

Perry, GE and WF Maloney (2007). Overview. In Informality: Exit and Exclusion, GE Perry, WF Maloney, OS Arias, P Fajnzylber, AD Mason and J Saavedra-Chanduvi (eds.). Washington DC: World Bank.

Singh, G and A De Noble (2003). Early retirees as the next generation of entrepreneurs. Entre- preneurship Theory and Practice, 27(3), 207–26.

Travers, A (2002). Prospects for Enterprise: An Investigation into the Motivations of Workers in the Informal Economy. Evidence paper No. 2. London: Community Links.

USAID (2006). Micro and Small Enterprises, Dynamic Economic Growth and Poverty Reduction: A Review of the Conceptual and Empirical Effects of MSES on Development (Micro Report #62). Washington, DC: USAID.

Webb, JW, GD Bruton, L Tihanyi and R Ireland (2013). Research on entrepreneurship in the informal economy: Framing a research agenda. Journal of Business Venturing, 28(5), 598–614.

Williams, CC (2013). Beyond the formal economy: Evaluating the level of employment in informal sector enterprises in global perspective. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 18(4), 1.

––– (2009). Beyond legitimate entrepreneurship: The prevalence of off-the-books entrepreneurs in Ukraine. Journal of Small Business and Entrepreneurship, 22(1), 55–68.

––– (2008). Beyond necessity-driven versus opportunity-driven entrepreneurship: A study of in- formal entrepreneurs in England, Russia and Ukraine. International Journal of Entre- preneurship and Innovation, 9(3), 157–66.

––– (2007). The nature of entrepreneurship in the informal sector: Evidence from England. Journal of Development Entrepreneurship, 12(2), 239–54.

––– (2006). The Hidden Enterprise Culture: Entrepreneurship in the Underground Economy. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar.

Williams, CC, J Round and P Rodgers (2009). Evaluating the motives of informal entrepreneurs: Some lessons from Ukraine. Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship, 14(1), 59–71.

C. F. Achua & R. N. Lussier

1450024-12

Copyright of Journal of Developmental Entrepreneurship is the property of World Scientific Publishing Company and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.