IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/ijefaa/v13y2021i12p24.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Women Entrepreneurs and Bankruptcy: An Empirical Analysis in Italy

Author

Listed:
  • Ferdinando Giglio

Abstract

This work aims to estimate the probability of bankruptcy of female entrepreneurs in Italy, particularly in the Campania region. Women who run businesses always continue to be disregarded by banks when applying for a loan due to several problems including- the small size of their companies and the low number of employees. The companies were selected by Aida. Through the T-test the probability of bankruptcy of male and female companies was compared, however, the variables that have the greatest impact on gender were examined with the regression model. It was found that, albeit slightly, female entrepreneurs have a lower probability of failure than their male counterparts.

Suggested Citation

  • Ferdinando Giglio, 2021. "Women Entrepreneurs and Bankruptcy: An Empirical Analysis in Italy," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(12), pages 1-24, December.
    • Handle: RePEc:ibn:ijefaa:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:24
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijef/article/download/0/0/46208/49256
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/ijef/article/view/0/46208
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Gary Akehurst & Enrique Simarro & Alicia Mas‐Tur, 2012. "Women entrepreneurship in small service firms: motivations, barriers and performance," The Service Industries Journal, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 32(15), pages 2489-2505, January.
    2. Catherine C. Eckel & Philip J. Grossman, 2008. "Forecasting Risk Attitudes: An Experimental Study Using Actual and Forecast Gamble Choices," Monash Economics Working Papers archive-01, Monash University, Department of Economics.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Ferdinando Giglio, 2020. "Access to Credit and Women Entrepreneurs: A Systematic Literature Review," European Research Studies Journal, European Research Studies Journal, vol. 0(4), pages 312-335.
    2. Ferdinando Giglio, 2021. "Access to Credit and Women Entrepreneurs: A Systematic Literature Review," International Journal of Economics and Finance, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 13(10), pages 1-12, September.
    3. Kyung Hwan Baik & Subhasish M. Chowdhury & Abhijit Ramalingam, 2021. "Group size and matching protocol in contests," Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue canadienne d'économique, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 54(4), pages 1716-1736, November.
    4. Gustavo J. Bobonis & Paul J. Gertler & Marco Gonzalez-Navarro & Simeon Nichter, 2022. "Vulnerability and Clientelism," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 112(11), pages 3627-3659, November.
    5. Kerri Brick & Martine Visser & Justine Burns, 2012. "Risk Aversion: Experimental Evidence from South African Fishing Communities," American Journal of Agricultural Economics, Agricultural and Applied Economics Association, vol. 94(1), pages 133-152.
    6. Belzil, Christian & Sidibé, Modibo, 2016. "Internal and External Validity of Experimental Risk and Time Preferences," IZA Discussion Papers 10348, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    7. Ye-Feng Chen & Shu-Guang Jiang & Marie Claire Villeval, 2015. "The Tragedy of Corruption. Corruption as a social dilemma," Working Papers 1531, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    8. Freundt, Jana & Lange, Andreas, 2021. "On the voluntary provision of public goods under risk," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 93(C).
    9. Blair Cleave & Nikos Nikiforakis & Robert Slonim, 2013. "Is there selection bias in laboratory experiments? The case of social and risk preferences," Experimental Economics, Springer;Economic Science Association, vol. 16(3), pages 372-382, September.
    10. Zheng, Kaiming & Wang, Xiaoyuan & Ni, Debing, 2021. "Reciprocity information and wage personalization," China Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 68(C).
    11. Raziiakhan Abdieva & Burulcha Sulaimanova & Kamalbek Karymshakov, 2019. "Gender differences, risk attitude and entrepreneurship in Kyrgyzstan," Economics and Business Letters, Oviedo University Press, vol. 8(1), pages 17-30.
    12. Marie-Claire Villeval & Nabanita Datta Gupta & Anders Poulsen, 2005. "Male and Female Competitive Behavior - Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 0512, Groupe d'Analyse et de Théorie Economique Lyon St-Étienne (GATE Lyon St-Étienne), Université de Lyon.
    13. Zubanov, Nick & Cadsby, Bram & Song, Fei, 2017. "The," IZA Discussion Papers 10542, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    14. Chetan Dave & Catherine Eckel & Cathleen Johnson & Christian Rojas, 2010. "Eliciting risk preferences: When is simple better?," Journal of Risk and Uncertainty, Springer, vol. 41(3), pages 219-243, December.
    15. Füllbrunn, Sascha & Luhan, Wolfgang J., 2015. "Am I my Peer's Keeper? Social Responsibility in Financial Decision Making," Ruhr Economic Papers 551, RWI - Leibniz-Institut für Wirtschaftsforschung, Ruhr-University Bochum, TU Dortmund University, University of Duisburg-Essen.
    16. Galanis, S. & Ioannou, C. & Kotronis, S., 2019. "Information Aggregation Under Ambiguity: Theory and Experimental Evidence," Working Papers 20/05, Department of Economics, City University London.
    17. Aimone, Jason A. & Pan, Xiaofei, 2020. "Blameable and imperfect: A study of risk-taking and accountability," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 172(C), pages 196-216.
    18. Hermansson, Cecilia, 2018. "Can self-assessed financial risk measures explain and predict bank customers’ objective financial risk?," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 148(C), pages 226-240.
    19. Jeanette A.M.J. Deetlefs & Mathew Chylinski & Andreas Ortmann, 2015. "MTurk ‘Unscrubbed’: Exploring the good, the ‘Super’, and the unreliable on Amazon’s Mechanical Turk," Discussion Papers 2015-20, School of Economics, The University of New South Wales.
    20. Luisa Menapace & Gregory Colson & Roberta Raffaelli, 2016. "A comparison of hypothetical risk attitude elicitation instruments for explaining farmer crop insurance purchases," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 43(1), pages 113-135.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:ijefaa:v:13:y:2021:i:12:p:24. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.