The phenomenon of regional differences in entrepreneurial activities has become a hot topic of common concern in academia and practice. Since institutions determine the relative benefits of different activities in society and determine whether individuals are willing to allocate their efforts to productive entrepreneurial activities, it has been regarded as a key factor affecting individual entrepreneurial choices and regional entrepreneurial activity. However, the understanding of institutional influence in entrepreneurship is still relatively weak in existing research, which tends to focus on the development level of overall institution or specific single institution. Even though some studies recognize that the overall institutional environment is composed of different institutions, they are accustomed to viewing multiple institutions as homogeneous or interrelated, and assume the simple accumulation of multiple institutional effects, which lack in-depth analysis of the effects of different institutions and their complex combinations.
Based on the perspective of unbundling institutions, this article regards the contracting institutions and property rights institutions as two main dimensions of formal institutions. We use a sample of 355769 individuals from 54 countries between 2010-2015 applying a multilevel models to examine how different institutions affect entrepreneurship. Our results demonstrate that although both the improvement of contracting institutions and property rights institutions can help promote individual entrepreneurial entry behavior. However, the contracting institutions determine the direct transaction costs that entrepreneurial enterprises need to pay in business activities, which is mainly related to the short-term operating costs of entrepreneurship. The property rights institutions are reflected in protecting the interests of property rights owners and preventing exploitation by administrative agencies, which is mainly related to the guarantee of long-term benefits of entrepreneurship. Since these internal mechanisms differ, the contracting institutions will have a more significant effect in promoting individuals with low human capital and regions with low economic development levels. Oppositely, the property rights institutions will have a more significant effect in promoting individuals with high human capital and regions with high economic development levels. Further, such internal mechanisms differ will also lead to a potential offsetting effect between contracting institutions and property rights institutions.This article can provide theoretical contributions in the following aspects: First of all, by highlighting the influence mechanism of different institutions, this article show that it is valuable and necessary to divide the diversified institutions. Existing research often explores a single or overall institutional effect from the assumptions of institutions homogeneity. However, the institutions are diverse. Secondly, by analyzing the complex impact of different institutions, this article will help to transform the field discussions from a simple analysis to a complex analysis of multiple institutions. Existing research usually assumes that the simple accumulation of different institutions effects will build the overall effect. However,we show that the differences mechanisms of contracting institutions and property rights institutions will even lead to potential mutual offset effects. Third, through the integration of individual decision-making logic and macro situations constraints, this article establishes the theoretical framework for individual entrepreneurial decisions, which will help fully understand behavior patterns of entrepreneurs in complex environments.
Relying on the important strategic deployment of“the new development pattern of domestic large circulation as the main body and domestic and international double circulation promoting each other”, how to optimize the quality of export products in the manufacturing industry by changing the production capacity model is particularly important. At the same time,different from the traditional economic transformation, the“inner cycle”production capacity model and the quality of manufacturing export products must not only meet the needs of economic interests, but also always maintain the development needs of environmental sustainability. Therefore, this paper introduces environmental regulation as an external control framework to further improve the“internal circulation”production capacity model and the environmental sustainability of manufacturing export product quality.
Based on the theory of production capacity coordination and the concept of high-quality development, this paper constructs an equilibrium quantity model to describe the connotation of“internal circulation”production capacity model and the influence mechanism of export product quality. On this basis, a threshold model is adopted to test the relationship between “internal circulation”production capacity and the quality of manufacturing export products under environmental regulations from 2010 to 2020. The research finds that, first, under the precondition of complying with environmental regulations, the“internal circulation”capacity model has a promoting effect on the export quality of manufacturing industry, but the regional“internal circulation”capacity model has a phased development process. Second, although scientific and technological innovation can optimize the equilibrium relationship between capacity quality and capacity scale in the“inner cycle”production capacity model and achieve continuous optimization of the quality of export products, the characteristics of production capital distribution and regional economic preferences are still the main constraints on the optimization of quality factors in the“inner cycle”production capacity model. Environmental regulation, transportation infrastructure and digital empowerment can effectively accelerate the product quality optimization process of the“inner cycle”capacity model, and avoid the structural imbalance between capacity quality and capacity scale.
Compared with the traditional research on production capacity and manufacturing export product quality, the main contributions of this paper are as follows: First, on the basis of building a quantitative model to establish the connotation of“inner cycle”production capacity model, this study enriches the theoretical content and empirical results of“inner cycle”production capacity model on manufacturing export product quality, and provides a more comprehensive basis for manufacturing production capacity transformation strategy. Second, based on the conclusion of the literature study on the cost of environmental regulation, this paper introduces environmental regulation into mathematics, and further reviews the impact mechanism of environmental regulation on the quality of export products and the“internal circulation”production capacity model. Finally, although the mathematical model and theoretical mechanism can better present the impact of various factors in the“inner cycle”production capacity model on the quality of manufacturing export products. But this does not mean that the link between the three elements is unimpeded. Based on this, on the basis of the main research content, this paper derived research on the theoretical mechanism of the interactive effect of transportation infrastructure, digital empowerment and“inner cycle” productivity, to fill the lack of research on the link relationship of relevant factors.