Do Chinese Family Values Inhibit Entrepreneurship?—An Analytical Perspective Based on Hofstede’s Cultural Dimension

Qiqi He¹, Liang Ma¹, Qixu Gan²

¹School of Economics, Hangzhou Dianzi University, Hangzhou, China.
²School of Economics, Lanzhou University of Finance and Economics, Lanzhou, China.

DOI: 10.4236/jss.2022.1013027                

Abstract

Using the data of the China Family Tracking Survey (CFPS) of Peking University, this paper systematically studies the influence of Chinese family cultural values on Chinese entrepreneurship. Based on Hofstede’s national culture theory and from five dimensions of collectivism, power distance, masculinity, long-term orientation and uncertainty avoidance, this paper further constructs a comprehensive index of family cultural values. Through endogeneity test, it is found that the comprehensive family cultural values significantly improve the number of entrepreneurs, but not the quality of entrepreneurs. Among them, collectivism, masculinity and long-term orientation promote entrepreneurship, while power distance and uncertainty avoidance significantly inhibit it. Meanwhile, the entrepreneurial spirit of male group, rural group and low-education group is more significantly influenced by traditional family cultural values. Further research shows that with the improvement of regional marketization level, digital level and institutional environment represented by inclusive finance, the negative impact of power distance and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship can be effectively reduced, but the positive impact of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship can also be reduced. The results of this paper show that in the process of cultivating entrepreneurship, we should not ignore the positive role of traditional culture, retain and carry forward the part of traditional culture that is conducive to entrepreneurship, gradually reduce the part of traditional culture that is not conducive to the development of entrepreneurship through the continuous improvement of the system environment, and improve the precision of the policy. We will further promote mass entrepreneurship and innovation.

Keywords

Family Culture Values, System Environment, Entrepreneurship

1. Introduction

A large number of studies have shown that formal system and economic development are important factors affecting the formation of entrepreneurship, such as government regulation (Chen, 2015), corruption (Huang et al., 2019), economic stability (McMillan et al., 2002), etc. However, the influence of family culture represented by Chinese Confucianism on entrepreneurship is usually ignored. Culture is the value and personal outlook inherited by a nation in the long-term development process, and its influence on people’s economic behavior is continuous and stable (Guiso et al., 2006). In our country, the historical development and evolution of traditional family culture have exerted profound influence (Du, 1997). However, western scholars have always believed that the Western modernist culture represented by independent self and worldly economic return is conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship, while the traditional family cultural values represented by Confucian culture are not conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship due to the lack of rationality and fear of change (Max, 2010). These theories argue that entrepreneurship can only be effectively shaped in a culture that values risk-taking and individualism. However, a large number of practical evidences refuted the above conclusion. Since the end of World War II, East Asian countries represented by the Confucian family culture have made remarkable achievements, and China has also achieved tremendous economic growth after the reform and opening up. In 2020, China’s GDP will reach about 14.7 trillion US dollars, surpassing the total GDP of Japan, Germany, India and the UK. At the same time, a large number of studies also show that countries with collectivist traditional culture as the orientation, such as China, Vietnam, India, Chile, etc., have a higher degree of entrepreneurial activity than many western developed countries (Acs et al., 2004; Bosma et al., 2006; Freytag et al., 2007), which makes people question whether the traditional family cultural values represented by Confucianism promote or hinder the formation of Chinese people’s entrepreneurial spirit.

In order to clarify the influence of national culture on the formation of entrepreneurship, some foreign scholars have made an empirical test on the relationship between the two (Morris et al., 1993; Davidsson et al., 1997), however, most of these studies are based on discussions under Western culture, and most of them use regional or even company data to test the impact of family culture on entrepreneurship, and the research conclusions are also controversial. In the few domestic literatures, Confucian culture is only measured by the number of regional scholars or academies (Chen et al., 2021). This measurement method cannot objectively reflect the connotation of Chinese family culture, cannot measure Chinese family cultural values in a multidimensional and comprehensive way, and does not fully consider the impact and replacement effect of institutional environment changes on traditional culture. Based on the above reasons, this paper uses the data of China Household Tracking Survey (CFPS) of Peking University, refers to the national culture theory of Hofstede (1996) and the definition of cultural values by Huang Aimei, Zheng Yuanqing (2020) and Qi Fei (2016). This paper measures our family cultural concepts from five dimensions, namely collectivism, power distance, masculinity, long-term orientation and uncertainty avoidance, and further studies the effects of different dimensions of family cultural concepts in the entrepreneurial process, and verifies the heterogeneity of family cultural values in different groups on entrepreneurship. And further discusses the important role of improving the system environment under the background of Confucian family culture.

This paper makes the following contributions: 1) Deepen the understanding of the relationship between Chinese traditional family culture and entrepreneurial spirit. The research conclusion shows that Chinese traditional family culture plays a positive role in promoting the quantity level of entrepreneurial spirit on the whole, which provides the new evidence to clarify the relationship between Chinese traditional culture and entrepreneurial spirit. 2) The research finds that the influence of family cultural concepts on male groups, rural groups and groups with low education is more significant, which helps to clarify the main body of entrepreneurs based on traditional culture and improve the accuracy of policies, providing theoretical basis for the formulation of relevant entrepreneurship support policies; 3) It provides useful reference for the construction of cultural power, the enhancement of national cultural soft power and the establishment of cultural confidence. The research conclusions of this paper provide strong evidence for the promotion of Chinese traditional culture, and help innovation and entrepreneurship activities to move forward to a deeper level.

2. Theoretical Development and Research Hypothesis

2.1. The Formation of Family Cultural Values and Entrepreneurial Spirit

There are two explanations for the influence of national culture on entrepreneurship. One is the direct influence, that is, the “cultural and personal behavior hypothesis”, which holds that the differentiated cultural environment of a country or region will directly affect people’s attitudes, and then affect people’s economic decisions such as entrepreneurship (Hofstede, 1980). Another explanation is indirect influence, namely the “cultural and institutional hypothesis”, which holds that cultural tradition is an informal system, which can influence and shape the formal system of a country to a large extent, such as fair competitive market, legal environment and financial system conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship, etc. (North, 2005). And then it affects the formation of entrepreneurship. Therefore, based on the above two theories, it can be shown that different cultural backgrounds have differentiated influences on the formation of entrepreneurship.

Specifically in China, Confucianism, as the core theory of family culture, mainly summarizes the important understanding and basic principles of Confucius and his disciples in outlook on life and values, which profoundly reflects the essence and connotation of Chinese culture, namely, fraternity, fairness, justice, honesty, faithfulness, civilization, harmony, democracy, rule of law, etc. (Huang et al., 2020). According to the “incentive-health” two-factor theory (Herzberg, 1968), traditionalism culture usually plays a “health care role” in the formation of entrepreneurship, while modernism culture can have an “incentive” influence on high-quality entrepreneurship (Zhao et al., 2012). The establishment of this conclusion is mainly based on two explanations: First, according to the relevant research of system theory, it is found that developing countries usually lack the perfect formal system and environment of developed countries. As a supplement, traditional culture represented by family culture and kinship society is helpful for entrepreneurs to obtain entrepreneurial support and entrepreneurial resources (Xin & Pearce, 1996). At the same time, the mutual assistance model based on family relationship also helps to reduce entrepreneurs’ doubts about entrepreneurial activities and fear of entrepreneurial failure, which is conducive to the formation of entrepreneurial spirit (Jansson et al., 2007; Zhao et al., 2010); Secondly, as for Chinese traditional culture, based on Hofstede’s (1996) national culture theory, the cultural dimensions of Chinese family ideas can be summarized into five dimensions, namely collectivism, power distance, masculinity, uncertainty avoidance and long-term orientation, which may have important influence on the formation of people’s entrepreneurial spirit. For example, although the traditional view is that collectivism is not conducive to the development of innovation and entrepreneurship in western developed countries, more and more relevant studies based on scenario theory have found that in collectivist oriented countries, Cooperation and team cohesion embodied in collectivism can also promote the formation of entrepreneurship (Shane et al., 1995); in terms of power distance, a higher power distance index will hinder the probability of upward mobility of the people at the bottom, resulting in the generation of class solidification (Gelekanycz, 1997), and a higher power distance index will further hinder the people at the bottom from obtaining necessary entrepreneurial information and resources. Thus, it is not conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship (Kirzner, 1997). In terms of masculinity, according to Hofstede’s definition of the dimensions of masculinity, masculinity usually means strong, brave and eager pursuit of money and success. Members of society with this kind of masculinity are usually innovative, full of ambition and clear goals (Xu, 2013), so they are more motivated to change their fate through entrepreneurial activities. Conducive to the formation of entrepreneurial spirit; In terms of uncertainty avoidance, according to relevant theories of entrepreneurship, uncertainty refers to the unknown size of the distribution range and state of the future risk (McMullan & Shepherd, 2006). In the process of starting a business, entrepreneurs usually face various unknown conditions. Therefore, theoretically speaking, People in areas with higher uncertainty avoidance index are usually more likely to feel the threat degree of uncertain and ambiguous situations, and try to provide greater occupational safety and establish more formal rules to avoid these situations (Muller & Thomas, 2000), therefore, the probability of entrepreneurship is small, which is not conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship; In terms of long-term orientation, people in regions with strong long-term orientation are more willing to accept the constraints of social morality, and more emphasis is placed on achieving the goal of long-term coexistence through harmonious interpersonal relations. Therefore, the individual emotional tolerance is higher under this culture. The Oriental Confucian family culture that attaches importance to interpersonal relations not only provides necessary social capital support for entrepreneurs to start their own businesses. At the same time, interpersonal relationship orientation also reflects the tolerance of entrepreneurial failure (Schloesser et al., 2010), so it plays a positive role in the formation of public entrepreneurship.

The above arguments demonstrate that different levels of Chinese family cultural values may affect the formation of residents’ entrepreneurial spirit. Specifically, as for the main body of entrepreneurs, according to the Survey Report on Entrepreneurial Enterprises compiled by the China Economic Trends Research Institute in 2021, young and middle-aged men are still the main force of entrepreneurship in China, while female entrepreneurs account for less than 1/3. In addition, from the perspective of entrepreneurial types, Chinese people are still mainly subsistence entrepreneurs, and the proportion of opportunistic entrepreneurs is not high. However, most entrepreneurs of this type are mainly rural population and low-educated population who have not received higher education. Limited by their local area and information ability, this type of entrepreneurs is usually a group highly influenced by the traditional Confucian family culture. Therefore, the formation of entrepreneurship in male, rural and low-educated groups may be influenced more obviously by traditional family culture.

Based on the above inference, we propose hypothesis 1a: In China, traditional family cultural values are positively correlated with the quantity of entrepreneurship, but not with the quality of entrepreneurship. Collectivism, masculinity and long-term orientation are conducive to the formation of Chinese entrepreneurial spirit, and power distance and uncertainty avoidance hinder the formation of entrepreneurial spirit. 1b: The influence of traditional family culture on the formation of entrepreneurship is more obvious in male group, rural group and low-educated group.

2.2. The Formation of Confucian Culture and Entrepreneurial Spirit under the Background of Globalization

According to the relevant research of institutional theory, the institutional environment of a country will affect the behavioral decision of entrepreneurs through the absorption of relevant resources (Hwang & Powell, 2005; Bruton et al., 2010), under the background of globalization, with the continuous improvement of China’s openness to the outside world, the global values represented by the rule of law and the market also have a huge impact on the traditional Chinese Confucianism, which continuously enhances the important role of marketization in the economy. The digitalization and financial inclusion brought by globalization are also having a profound impact on the formation of China’s entrepreneurial environment.

Firstly, in terms of political system, the discussion on the relationship between the market and the government during the formation of entrepreneurship is the focus of the research. According to the theory of public interest, market failure is inevitable in economic activities, so the government’s intervention in the economy is indispensable (Pigou, 2007). However, other studies are against this view. According to the public choice theory, the government usually intervenes in the economic process not in good faith, but for the purpose of seizing rent (Shleifer & Vishny, 1993), which will lead to resource mismatch, increase start-up costs and ultimately hinder the formation of entrepreneurship. More and more empirical evidence also verifies the reliability of the latter conclusion (Djankov, 2009; Klapper, 2006; Chen, 2015), therefore, marketization level will affect the formation of entrepreneurship. In addition to the discussion on marketization level, in recent years, the integration of digital economy and industry has also exerted an important influence on Chinese innovation and entrepreneurship (Zhao et al., 2020). The mechanism of digital economy affecting entrepreneurship mainly includes three aspects: 1) By meeting the different needs of customers and promoting the development of product markets, digital economy can lay a foundation for entrepreneurs to start businesses (Luo et al., 2015; Guo et al., 2016); 2) The development of digital economy helps entrepreneurs obtain the necessary information in time and provides information channels for entrepreneurs to start businesses (Zhou et al., 2018); 3) As a way of social communication, digital technology has social attributes, which reduces the communication cost between people, expands the individual social network, and further promotes the formation of entrepreneurship. Finally, in terms of market system, the availability of venture capital (De Bettignies, 2007) is an important factor affecting entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurship, among which venture capital is the primary resource for entrepreneurship. However, in reality, due to the existence of “financial exclusion”, it is difficult for “small and medium-sized weak” enterprises to obtain traditional financial services. However, traditional finance emphasizes the depth of financial services, which also makes it difficult for these groups to obtain the benefits brought by the expansion of financial aggregate (Li et al., 2020). Compared with traditional finance, inclusive finance lays more emphasis on the breadth of financial services. Inclusive finance can increase the probability of vulnerable groups to obtain venture capital, solve the problem of lack of venture capital, and effectively improve people’s human capital and financial literacy, thus improving the development of entrepreneurial activities (Zhang et al., 2017; Miao Jianwen, 2018), which is conducive to the formation of people’s entrepreneurship.

Institutional environment can not only directly affect the formation of entrepreneurship, but also indirectly affect the formation of entrepreneurship under different cultural backgrounds through the construction of market environment (Reynolds et al., 2003). In countries with modernist culture with perfect institutional environment, due to their fair competitive market, perfect legal system and mature financial market, the cost caused by rent-seeking can be effectively reduced, which is conducive to stimulating and protecting the entrepreneurial spirit. Therefore, the entrepreneurial spirit is usually of high quality and mostly opportunistic entrepreneurship (Xin et al., 2014). However, in countries with traditional family culture dominated by Confucian culture, entrepreneurial activities are usually carried out based on kinship network, thus forming subsistence entrepreneurship centered on family or clan (Zhao et al., 2012). With the improvement of institutional environment, in areas with better institutional environment, it will have an impact and influence on the previous relations-oriented entrepreneurial forms. For example, with the reduction of government regulation, the continuous application of digital technology and the deepening of inclusive finance, it will effectively reduce the cost of rent-seeking brought by power distance. Entrepreneurs can obtain entrepreneurial resources and opportunities more equitably (Dreher et al., 2013). In addition, the improvement of the institutional environment also encourages individuals to regard entrepreneurial success as the reflection of their own abilities, so that they are more likely to accept the uncertainties in the future entrepreneurial process (Ye et al., 2018). Therefore, the improvement of institutional environment can effectively alleviate the adverse effects of power distance and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship. In addition, with the improvement of the institutional environment, the protection of entrepreneurs and the tolerance of entrepreneurial failure are enhanced, and the acquisition of entrepreneurial resources by entrepreneurs is more through market-oriented rules rather than the interpersonal network under long-term guidance. Therefore, with the improvement of the institutional environment, the promoting effect of long-term guidance on the formation of entrepreneurship will gradually weaken.

Based on the above inference, we put forward hypothesis 2a: the improvement of institutional environment represented by marketization level, digitalization level and financial inclusion level will have a significant positive impact on the formation of entrepreneurship; 2b: The improvement of institutional environment plays an important moderating role in the process of the influence of traditional family cultural concepts on entrepreneurship.

3. Data and Variable Construction

3.1. Data Sources and Regression Models

3.1.1. Data Introduction

The data used in this paper are from 5 national databases and research reports in 2014 and 2016, including the data of the China Household Tracking Survey Project (CFPS) of Peking University, the Fan Gang Marketization Index Report, the White Paper of China Digital Economy Index and the Peking University Digital Financial Inclusion Index Report. At the micro level, the data of China Household Tracking Survey is used for research. The database covers 29 provinces and municipalities across the country. The survey covers village groups, families, adults and children, and collects information about residents’ personal signs, income, expenditure, education, life attitude and other aspects. This paper mainly adopts the tracking data of village groups, families and adults from the 2014 survey data, and retains 17,890 entrepreneurial samples after eliminating the missing samples and invalid samples. In addition, we also match the family and adult questionnaires of CFPS data in 2016 for endogeneity test, and match and retain 14,012 entrepreneurial samples. The sample ensures the study is extensive and rigorous. The macro-level data mainly come from three white papers or reports, among which the regional marketization level comes from the Fan Gang Marketization Index report, which measures the level and degree of regional marketization development. The regional digitalization level comes from the white paper of China Digital Economy Index to evaluate the development level of digital economy in each region. The regional financial inclusion level comes from the Peking University Digital Financial Inclusion Index report, which makes a systematic evaluation of the financial inclusion level in various regions from both depth and breadth.

On the basis of reasonable matching of micro data and macro data, we study how family cultural values affect the formation of residents’ entrepreneurship under different institutional environments. On the basis of meeting the basic requirements of hierarchical regression, the samples also consider the influence of macro institutional environment.

3.1.2. Regression Model

This paper first uses the following model to study the impact of residents’ family cultural concepts on the formation of entrepreneurship:

${\text{Entreprenrursship}}_i={\alpha }_0+{\text{culturalconcept}}_i+{\alpha }_3{X}_i+{\epsilon }_i$

Among them, ${\text{Entreprenrursship}}_i$ represents the entrepreneurial spirit, ${\text{culturalconcept}}_i$ represents the individual’s family cultural concept, $X_i$ is the individual and family characteristic variables, including gender, age, marriage, education level, etc. ${\epsilon }_i$ represents the residual term. Since the dependent variable is a binary dummy variable, this paper adopts the Probit model for regression. In order to reduce the endogeneity problems that may be caused by reverse causality, this paper matches the tracking individuals of 2014 and 2016, retains the family cultural concepts of 2014, and replaces the independent variables and control variables with the data of 2016. In other words, by analyzing the influence of family cultural concepts in 2014 on the formation of entrepreneurship in 2016, we can overcome the previous possible reverse causality.

Further, in order to test the role of institutional environment improvement variables in the influence of family culture on the formation of entrepreneurship, we use the following model for verification:

$\begin{array}{c}{\text{Entrepreneurship}}_i={\alpha }_0+{\alpha }_1{\text{culturalcancept}}_i+{\alpha }_2{\text{system}}_i\\ +{\alpha }_3{\text{culturalcancept}}_i\times {\text{system}}_i+{\alpha }_4{X}_i+{\epsilon }_i\end{array}$

On the basis of the above formula, environmental institutional variables are further added ${\text{system}}_i$ and the interaction between environmental institutional variables and family cultural concepts ${\text{culturalcancept}}_i\times {\text{system}}_i$, in order to explore the moderating effect of the change of institutional environment on the formation of residents’ entrepreneurial spirit caused by traditional family cultural concepts.

3.2. Variable Construction and Descriptive Statistics

3.2.1. Explained Variable: Entrepreneurship

According to the research of Chen Gang (2015), according to the question “the nature of your work” in the 2014 CFPS survey data, the value of “private enterprise/self-employed/other self-employed” is assigned as 1, and the value of other answers is assigned as 0, thus constructing the quantity level of entrepreneurship. In addition, according to the relevant research of Zhao Xiangyang (2012), the quality of entrepreneurship of entrepreneurs is measured by selecting whether the number of employees employed by entrepreneurial enterprises exceeds 20, so as to construct the quality level of entrepreneurship.

3.2.2. Explanatory Variable: Family Cultural Values

By referring to the national culture theory of Hofstede (1996) and the definition of Chinese family culture by Huang Aimei, Zheng Yuanqing (2020) and Qi Fei (2016), this paper subdivides the family cultural values into the following five dimensions: collec tivism, power distance, masculinity, long-term orientation and uncertainty avoidance.

Collectivism: It reflects an individual’s recognition and emphasis on the collective (family or organization). The more obvious the collectivism tendency is, the more people usually attach importance to the collective interests and honor, and strive to achieve their own development through the collective power. Confucian family culture advocates clan blood, family, country and world feelings, and advocates “the world’s worries and worries before the world’s happiness”. Individuals are in the family, individuals are a member of the country, and strive for harmonious social relations (Guo, 2007). Therefore, this paper takes in the past 12 months, To measure the strength of collectivism concept, the answer “Yes” is 1, “no” is 0;

Power distance: reflects the public’s acceptance of power distribution in an organization. The higher the power distance index is, the more people trust the authority, the more they accept the hierarchy, and the more they are willing to obey authority (Huang et al., 2020). Generally speaking, the power distance index under the influence of Eastern culture is higher, while that under the influence of Western culture is lower. Based on this, the power distance index is measured by “how much trust you have for cadres”, and its value ranges from 0 to 10. The larger the value, the higher the power distance index, and the easier it is to submit to authority.

Masculinity: It usually reflects the importance people attach to career, success and money. The more masculine the temperament is, the more radical the mainstream ideas are, the more risk tolerant they are, and the more willing they are to make efforts for career success (Wei, 2011). In Chinese Confucian family culture, “Guiyang and base Yin” is also advocated. “The one above is Yang, and the one below is Yin”. Based on this, this paper selects the recognition degree of “men give priority to career and women give priority to family” in the questionnaire to describe the strength of masculinity, with values ranging from 1 - 5. In addition, in order to distinguish the difference between men and women, for men, the higher the value, the stronger the masculinity will be considered, while for women, the smaller the value, the stronger the masculinity will be considered, and the masculinity index will be constructed based on this.

Long-term orientation: It reflects people’s willingness to accept the constraints of socially recognized morality and the degree of tolerance to delayed satisfaction of material needs. The higher the tolerance of people with long-term orientation, the more harmonious they can get along with others. In Chinese Confucian family culture, it advocates “self-righteousness” and promotes obedience to moral education to regulate individual behaviors. “Do not do to others what you do not want others to do to you”, so our family culture has a high emotional tolerance, emphasizing that individuals should achieve interpersonal harmony in social life. Therefore, the question “How good do you think you are in getting along with others” is selected in this paper to measure the longterm orientation. The value ranges from 0 to 10. The higher the value, the stronger the emotional tolerance and the long-term orientation.

Uncertainty avoidance: It reflects people’s attitude towards uncertain events that may occur in the future. The stronger the uncertainty avoidance is, the more conservative it is and the weaker the risk tolerance. Therefore, it is often difficult to accept ideas that are different from the mainstream ideas. Specifically, in our traditional culture, there has always been the idea of raising children for old age, advocating the survival of incense. From the perspective of economics, raising children for old age is actually a response measure for parents to avoid the possible uncertainty and risks in the future. Based on this, the degree of approval for the question “having at least one son” in the questionnaire is used in this paper to measure the degree of uncertainty avoidance. The value ranges from 1 to 5. The larger the value, the higher the degree of approval and the higher the uncertainty avoidance index.

Comprehensive family cultural concepts: Referring to the practice of Tian Zifang (2020), this paper defines the power distance index and “0 - 6” in the long-term orientation as 0, and “7 - 10” as 1; “1 - 3” of masculinity and uncertainty avoidance is defined as 0 and “4 and 5” as 1. On this basis, the five dimensions of the subindexes of family cultural concepts are summed up to get the comprehensive index of family cultural concepts.

3.2.3. Moderating Variable: Institutional Environment

There are three regulatory variable institutional environments in this paper, which are regional marketization level, regional digital economy level and regional financial inclusion level. In the test of the regulatory effect, they are matched into the micro data according to the region and studied:

Regional marketization level: This paper adopts Fan Gang marketization Index to measure, which comprehensively considers the level of regional marketization index from the relationship between government and market, non-state-owned economic development, product market development, factor market development, intermediary organization development and other aspects. This paper selects the general indicator of provincial marketization.

Regional digital economy level: This paper uses Caixin Think Tank’s China Digital Economy Index to measure, which makes a comprehensive assessment of regional digital development level from four dimensions of data and information infrastructure, urban services, urban governance and industrial integration, and divides first-tier, second-tier, third-tier, fourth-tier and fifth-tier cities and urban digital economy development stages.

Regional development level of inclusive finance: This paper adopts the Peking University Digital Financial Inclusion Index, which in addition to the total index, also describes different dimensions of financial inclusion, such as coverage breadth, use depth and digitalization degree, as well as business sub-indexes of payment, insurance, money fund, credit service, investment and credit. This paper selects the two indexes which can best reflect the development level of inclusive finance, namely the breadth and depth of inclusive finance, to measure the development level of inclusive finance in the region.

3.2.4. Variable of Control

In addition, this paper also selects a series of control variables to enhance the persuasiveness of the paper. The control variables that describe the basic identity information of individuals include age, sex, health, marriage, household registration and ethnicity. The study population in this paper is the working-age group, so the range of age variables is controlled from 16 to 65 years old, and the age square term/100 is added to check whether there is a U-shaped relationship between age and entrepreneurship. The gender dummy variable is set 0 as female and 1 as male. Health is personal self-evaluation 1 - 5, the higher the evaluation, the better the health status of the individual; the variable of education level is assigned a value of 1 - 8 from illiteracy to doctor’s degree. The larger the value is, the higher the education level is. The selection of marriage variables set married with spouse and widowed as 1, and set unmarried, cohabitation and divorce as 0. The rural household registration variable is set as 0 for urban household registration and 1 for rural household registration. Ethnic Han is defined as 1, and other ethnic groups as 0. The control variables describing individual characteristics include social status, religious belief and political identity, among which personal social status is the self-evaluation variable, ranging from 1 - 5. The larger the value, the higher the evaluation of personal self-social status. Dummy variables were set for religious belief. 0 was defined as no religious belief and 1 was defined as having religious belief. Political identity set dummy variables, defined 0 as non-party member, 1 as party member; In addition, in terms of family characteristic variables, this paper selects the number of family members and the proportion of minors as variables of family size, and uses the number of family real estate to describe the size of fixed assets of a family. In addition, this paper also controls the characteristics of regional variables. The following is the descriptive statistical Table 1.

4. Empirical Research and Result Analysis

4.1. Regression of Base

This paper firstly studies the effects of Chinese residents’ comprehensive family cultural concepts and five different dimensions of family cultural concepts on the quantity level and quality level of enterprise spirit and reports the results as shown in Table 2.

In Table 2, the first and third columns report the impact of five dimensions of residents’ family cultural concepts, namely collectivism, power distance, masculinity, long-term orientation, uncertainty avoidance on the quantity level and quality level of Chinese residents’ entrepreneurial spirit. The second and fourth columns represent the impact of residents’ comprehensive family cultural concept on the quantity level and quality level of entrepreneurial spirit respectively. According to the regression results, collectivism, masculinity and long-term orientation significantly improve the entrepreneurial spirit at the quantitative level, while the power distance index and uncertainty avoidance significantly inhibit the entrepreneurial spirit. In addition, the comprehensive family cultural concept significantly increases the quantitative level of the entrepreneurial spirit at the level of 10%. In terms of the quality level of entrepreneurship, we find that neither the five dimensions of residents’ family cultural concept nor the comprehensive family cultural concept has a significant impact on the quality of entrepreneurship. In conclusion, it can be found that the family cultural concepts

Table 1. Descriptive statistics.

of Chinese residents can help to improve the quantity level of entrepreneurial spirit, but the impact on the quality level of entrepreneurial spirit is not significant. However, the collectivism, masculinity and long-term orientation in the 5 dimensions significantly improve the quantity of entrepreneurial spirit, while power distance and uncertainty avoidance suppress the quantity of entrepreneurial spirit.

In addition, in terms of the quantity level of entrepreneurship, the stable and significant control variables include: male head of household, higher education level, religious belief, more family members, more minors in the family, more real estate in the family, etc., have a significant positive promoting effect on the quantity level of entrepreneurship. In addition, the influence of age on the quantity level of entrepreneurship shows an inverted U-shape; the married head of household, health status, rural household registration and political status have significant negative influence on the quantity level of entrepreneurship. In terms of the quality level of entrepreneurship, robust and significant control variables include: The quality level of entrepreneurship of male household heads, residents with higher education level and political status is higher, while the quality level of entrepreneurship of household heads who are married, registered in rural areas, have religious beliefs, have more families, and have higher proportion of minors in the family is lower, which is basically consistent with the existing literature (Chen, 2015).

4.2. Discussion of Endogeneity

This paper shows that Chinese residents’ traditional family culture concept can significantly influence the formation of the entrepreneurial spirit. However, there is much controversy over whether the entrepreneurial spirit will influence the traditional family culture concept in reverse. First of all, traditional family culture is an important part of Chinese Confucian culture, and culture has been

Table 2. Basic regression results.

Note: p values are in brackets. *, ** and *** respectively represent significant at the level of 10%, 5% and 1%.

gradually formed over thousands of years, so it has considerable stability. Therefore, cultural ideas should be static, stable and transferable for a long time (Zhao et al., 2012). On the other hand, as an important economic behavior of residents, entrepreneurs’ entrepreneurial decision will be made after weighing the pros and cons of employment and entrepreneurship, time and wealth, benefits and costs, etc., which may have a reshaping influence on a person’s cultural concept. For example, entrepreneurs usually refer to the entrepreneurial model of their relatives and friends in the process of starting a business, which deviates from the assumption of rational economic man to a certain extent and leads to the blindness of entrepreneurship. In this process, their dependence on external factors will be increased and collectivism in the cultural values of residents’ families will be enhanced. Therefore, in order to reduce the possibility of such reverse causality, this paper, based on the practice of Tian Zifang (2020), matches the individuals of 2014 and 2016 according to the nature of CFPS tracking survey, retains the family cultural values of 2014, and replaces entrepreneurship and control variables with the data of 2016. In other words, by analyzing the influence of family cultural concepts in 2014 on entrepreneurship in 2016, we can overcome the previous possible reverse causality. The reported results are shown in Table 3. From the results reported in Table 3, the conclusion is consistent with the basic regression, that is, collectivism, long-term orientation and

Table 3. Endogeneity test results.

Note: p values are in brackets. *, ** and *** respectively represent significant at the level of 10%, 5% and 1%. Control variables are omitted for space.

masculinity still have a significant positive impact on the quantity level of entrepreneurship, while power distance and uncertainty avoidance have a significant negative impact on the quantity level of entrepreneurship. In terms of the quality of entrepreneurship, Neither the 5-dimensional family culture concept nor the comprehensive family culture concept has a significant impact on the quality level of entrepreneurship, which also verifies the reliability of the conclusion that Chinese family culture concept significantly improves the quantity level of entrepreneurship, but has no significant impact on the quality level of entrepreneurship. The conclusion proves the accuracy of hypothesis 1a.

4.3. Influence Analysis of Heterogeneity

The above research found that Chinese residents’ traditional family cultural concepts have a significant impact on the quantity level of residents’ entrepreneurship, and this impact may have a differentiated impact due to the different demographic characteristics of residents. Therefore, this paper continues to study the impact of family culture on entrepreneurship among different gender, household registration and educational background groups.

4.3.1. An Analysis of the Influence of Family Cultural Concepts on Entrepreneurship under Gender Differences

This paper studies the influence of family cultural concepts on entrepreneurship under different gender conditions. The report results are shown in Table 4. Column 1 and column 3 report the influence of family cultural concepts on male and female group entrepreneurship from five dimensions respectively. Column 2 and 4 report the effects of integrated family cultural concepts on the entrepreneurial spirit of male and female groups respectively.

According to the results reported in Table 4, the influence of family cultural concepts on male entrepreneurship is basically consistent with the basic regression, that is, the higher the collectivism, masculinity and long-term orientation of men, the more conducive to the formation of their entrepreneurship, while the higher the power distance index and uncertainty avoidance index of men, the less conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship. At the same time, the comprehensive family culture concept also significantly promoted the formation of male entrepreneurship; In the female group, only the power distance index and uncertainty avoidance significantly inhibit the formation of female entrepreneurship, collectivism, masculinity and long term orientation have no significant influence on the formation of female entrepreneurship, and the comprehensive family cultural concept has no significant influence on the formation of female entrepreneurship. Based on the above conclusions, it can be found that whether the family culture concept is segmented or integrated, it has a more significant impact on the formation of male entrepreneurship, while the impact on the formation of female entrepreneurship is not obvious. In other words, the entrepreneurial spirit of Chinese male groups is more significantly influenced by the family culture concept.

Table 4. Estimation results of the influence of family cultural concepts on entrepreneurship under the condition of gender difference.

Note: p values are in brackets. *, ** and *** respectively represent significant at the level of 10%, 5% and 1%. Control variables are omitted for space.

4.3.2. An Analysis of the Influence of Family Cultural Concept on Entrepreneurship under the Difference of Household Registration

This paper further studies the influence of family cultural concepts on entrepreneurship under different household registration, and the report results are shown in Table 5. Among them, the first column and the third column respectively report the impact of five dimensions of family cultural concepts on the entrepreneurial spirit of urban and rural groups, and the second and fourth column respectively report the impact of comprehensive family cultural concepts on the entrepreneurial spirit of urban and rural groups.

As can be seen from the results reported in Table 5, in urban groups, only collectivism has a significant positive impact on entrepreneurship, and the power distance index has a significant negative impact on entrepreneurship. The other three dimensions of family cultural concepts and integrated family cultural concepts have no significant impact on the entrepreneurial spirit of urban residents. In rural groups, both the five-dimension family cultural concept and the comprehensive family cultural concept have a significant impact on entrepreneurship, that is, in rural groups, the higher the collectivism, masculinity and long-term orientation, the more conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship, while the higher the power distance index and uncertainty avoidance

Table 5. Estimation results of the influence of family cultural concepts on entrepreneurship under the condition of household registration difference.

Note: p values are in brackets. *, ** and *** respectively represent significant at the level of 10%, 5% and 1%. Control variables are omitted for space.

index, the less conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship. But the comprehensive family culture concept significantly promoted the formation of rural residents’ entrepreneurial spirit. It can also be found from the above conclusions that whether the subdimensional family cultural concept or the comprehensive family cultural concept, it has a more significant impact on the formation of rural group entrepreneurship, that is, the formation of rural group entrepreneurship is more significantly influenced by family cultural concept.

4.3.3. An Analysis of the Influence of Family Cultural Concept on Entrepreneurship under Different Educational Background

This paper also studies the influence of family cultural concepts on entrepreneurship under different educational backgrounds. We divide the total samples into groups with high education and groups with low education according to whether they have attended university (junior college or above), and study the influence of family cultural concepts on the entrepreneurship of these two groups respectively. The report results are shown in Table 6. Among them, the first column and the third column respectively report the impact of five dimensions of family cultural concepts on the entrepreneurship of groups with high education and low education; the second column and the fourth column respectively report the impact of comprehensive family cultural concepts on the entrepreneurship of groups with high education and low education.

Table 6. Estimation results of the influence of family cultural concepts on entrepreneurship under the condition of educational differences.

Note: p values are in brackets. *, ** and *** respectively represent significant at the level of 10%, 5% and 1%. Control variables are omitted for space.

According to the results reported in Table 6, in the highly educated group, only the power distance index significantly inhibits the entrepreneurship of the highly educated group, while the other four classification indexes are not significant, and the comprehensive family cultural concept has no significant influence on the entrepreneurship of the highly educated group. However, in the group with low education, no matter the five dimensions of family cultural concepts or comprehensive family cultural concepts have a significant impact on the formation of entrepreneurship, that is, in the group with low education, the higher the collectivism, masculinity and long-term orientation, the more conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship. The higher the power distance index and uncertainty avoidance index, the less favorable the formation of their entrepreneurship. Meanwhile, the integrated family cultural concept also significantly improves the entrepreneurship of the group with low education. From the above conclusions, it can be found that both the sub-dimensional and comprehensive family cultural concepts have a more significant impact on the entrepreneurial spirit of the group with low education, but not on the entrepreneurial spirit of the group with high education. That is, in China, the formation of the entrepreneurial spirit of the group with low education is more significantly influenced by the family cultural concepts. To sum up the above conclusions, hypothesis 1b is proved to be correct, that is, the entrepreneurial spirit of the male, rural and low-educated groups is more significantly influenced by Chinese traditional family culture.

5. Further Research

The above research finds that although Chinese traditional family culture concept has improved the number of entrepreneurial spirit in general, factors such as power distance and uncertainty avoid are not conducive to the formation of Chinese enterprise spirit to some extent. At present, with the advancement of China’s marketization process, the overall living environment of Chinese entrepreneurs is also undergoing new changes, and these changes of institutional environment may have an alternative effect on the informal system represented by the traditional Confucian family culture. Therefore, this paper selects the regional marketization level, digital level and financial inclusion level. The regulating effects of these three institutional environmental indicators on the formation of entrepreneurship are investigated.

5.1. Institutional Environment of Entrepreneurship: The Moderating Effect of Regional Marketization Level

This paper first investigates the moderating effect of regional marketization level on the influence of family cultural concepts on the formation of entrepreneurship. The regional marketization level is measured by the regional marketization index, and the results are shown in Table 7.

In the regression result 1 of Table 7, regional marketization rate index and comprehensive family cultural concept index are introduced, and the results show that regional marketization level significantly improves regional entrepreneurship. Regression result 2 further introduces the interaction term between the regional marketization index and the comprehensive family cultural concept, and it can be found that the interaction term is not significant, which indicates that the regional marketization level does not play a significant regulating role in the process of the comprehensive family cultural concept affecting the formation of residents’ entrepreneurship. Furthermore, regression result 3 introduced the marketization rate index and the family cultural concept index of 5 dimensions. Regression result 4 further introduced the interaction terms of family cultural concept and marketization level of 5 dimensions. The regression results showed that the interaction terms of power distance, uncertainty avoidance and marketization level were significantly positive, while the interaction terms of long-term orientation and marketization level were significantly negative. The following conclusions can be drawn from this result: In other words, the inhibitory effect of power distance index and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship and the promoting effect of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship are more significant in regions with low marketization rate. In other words, in regions with less government intervention and high marketization rate, the negative impact of

Table 7. Estimated results of market level adjustment effect.

Note: p values are in brackets. *, ** and *** respectively represent significant at the level of 10%, 5% and 1%. Control variables are omitted for space.

power distance and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship and the positive impact of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship are smaller.

5.2. Institutional Environment of Entrepreneurship: The Moderating Effect of Regional Digitization Level

Further, this paper discusses the moderating effect of regional digitalization level on the influence of family cultural concepts on the formation of entrepreneurship. The regional digitalization level is measured by the regional digital economy index, and the regression results are shown in Table 8.

Table 8 Regression result 1 introduces the regional digitalization level and the integrated family cultural concept, and the results show that the regional digitalization level is conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship. Regression result 2 further introduces the interaction term between the regional digitalization

Table 8. Estimated results of regional digitization level adjustment effect.

Note: p values are in brackets. *, ** and *** respectively represent significant at the level of 10%, 5% and 1%. Control variables are omitted for space.

level and the comprehensive family cultural concept, and the result shows that the interaction term is not significant, which indicates that the regional digitalization level does not play a significant moderating role in the process of the comprehensive family cultural concept affecting the formation of entrepreneurship. Regression result 3 introduced the regional digitalization level and family cultural concepts of 5 dimensions, and regression result 4 further introduced the interaction terms of regional digitalization level and family cultural concepts of 5 dimensions. The regression results showed that the interaction terms of power distance, uncertainty avoidance and digitalization level were significantly positive, while the interaction terms of long-term orientation and digitalization level were significantly negative. The following conclusions can be drawn: In other words, the inhibitory effects of power distance index and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship and the promoting effects of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship are more significant in areas with low digitalization level. In other words, in areas with high digitalization level, the negative effects of power distance and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship and the positive effects of long-term orientation on resident entrepreneurship will decrease.

5.3. The Institutional Environment of Entrepreneurship: The Moderating Role of Financial Inclusion

This paper also continued to study the moderating effect of regional financial environment on the influence of family cultural concepts on the formation of entrepreneurship. The regional financial environment was measured by two indicators, namely the breadth and depth of inclusive finance, and the reported results are shown in Table 9.

In Table 9, regression results 1 - 4 reflect the role of financial inclusion breadth in the process of family cultural concepts influencing the formation of entrepreneurship. Among them, regression 1 introduces the financial inclusion breadth index and the comprehensive family cultural concept index, and the results show that the regional financial inclusion breadth is conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship. Regression 2 further introduces the interaction term of the two, which is not significant, indicating that the breadth of financial inclusion does not play a regulating role in the process of family cultural concepts affecting the formation of entrepreneurship. Regression 3 introduces financial inclusion breadth and five dimensions of family cultural concepts respectively, and regression 4 further introduces the interaction terms of financial inclusion breadth and five dimensions of family cultural concepts. The results show that the interaction terms of power distance, uncertainty avoidance and financial inclusion breadth are significantly positive, while the interaction terms of long-term orientation and financial inclusion breadth are significantly negative. The following conclusions can be drawn from this result: In other words, the inhibitory effects of power distance index and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship and the promoting effects of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship are more significant in regions with low financial inclusion breadth. In

Table 9. Estimated results of the adjustment effect of financial inclusion level.

Note: p values are in brackets. *, ** and *** respectively represent significant at the level of 10%, 5% and 1%. Control variables are omitted for space.

other words, in regions with high financial inclusion breadth, the negative effects of power distance and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship and the positive effects of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship will decrease. Regression results 5 - 8 reflect the effect of the depth of inclusive finance on the influence of family cultural ideas on entrepreneurship, and the conclusions are similar. Firstly, the depth of regional inclusive finance is conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship, while the depth of inclusive finance does not play a significant regulating role in the influence of family cultural ideas on the formation of entrepreneurship. Secondly, in regions with high financial inclusion depth, the negative impact of power distance and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship and the positive impact of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship will decrease. The above conclusions prove that in the formation of entrepreneurship, the improvement of financial inclusion level can help reduce the negative impact of power distance and uncertainty avoidance in family cultural concepts and the positive impact of long-term orientation.

To sum up the above conclusions, we find that the improvement of institutional environment represented by marketization, digitalization and inclusive finance will replace and impact family cultural concepts to a certain extent. In areas with high marketization, digitalization and inclusive finance, the adverse impact of power distance and uncertainty avoidance on entrepreneurship will be significantly reduced. Meanwhile, due to the improvement of institutional environment, Under the long-term orientation, the way of obtaining entrepreneurial resources through interpersonal network will be replaced by the formal market way. Therefore, the promoting effect of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship of residents in areas with improved institutional environment will also be reduced. The conclusion above proves the accuracy of hypothesis 2a and 2b.

5.4. Conclusion and Policy Recommendations

Does traditional family culture idea restrain the formation of Chinese entrepreneur spirit? Based on the data of Chinese family tracking survey in 2014 and 2016, this paper describes the family cultural values of Chinese residents from five dimensions, namely collectivism, power distance, masculinity, long-term orientation and uncertainty avoidance, and further constructs a comprehensive index of family cultural values. The research results show that: 1) On the whole, the family cultural concept is conducive to improving the quantity level of entrepreneurship, but has no significant impact on the quality level of entrepreneurship. In terms of subdivision, collectivism, masculinity and long-term orientation in family culture have significantly positive effects on the formation of entrepreneurship, while power distance and uncertainty avoidance are not conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship. There are both favorable and unfavorable factors in family culture. 2) The heterogeneity study shows that the entrepreneurial spirit of male group, rural group and low-education group is more significantly affected by the traditional family cultural concept. 3) The research on the moderating effect shows that the improvement of the institutional environment represented by marketization, digitalization and the amount of universal benefit can effectively reduce the negative influence of power distance and uncertainty avoidance in family cultural values on entrepreneurship, but also reduce the promoting effect of long-term orientation on entrepreneurship.

The above conclusions show that in the unique cultural system environment of China, although some ideas of Chinese traditional family culture, represented by Confucianism, are not conducive to the formation of entrepreneurship, but significantly promote the development of entrepreneurship on the whole. Therefore, we should know how to select the essence and discard the dross of Chinese traditional culture. In addition, whether it is the impact of marketization process on the formal system, the overall social and technological progress brought by the development of digital economy, or the facilitation and transformation of venture financing channels by inclusive finance, it will to some extent replace and weaken the influence of traditional family cultural concepts on the formation of entrepreneurship. For example, the traditional social sense of the world will be replaced by sound rules and regulations. The traditional worship of power and avoidance of future uncertainty will also be weakened in a more open and developed social life. Therefore, in the process of urbanization, the government should pay attention to maintain the heritage and protection of the essence of traditional culture, to face our traditional culture, do not become complacent, and do not underestimate themselves; the government should do a good job in cultural publicity, constantly improve the entrepreneurial environment, protect the entrepreneurial spirit, and give full play to the labor vitality of each individual. The marketization process, the development of digital economy and the popularization of inclusive finance will further improve the living environment of Chinese entrepreneurs, which will help to break the hierarchical concept in the traditional thought, reduce the government intervention, improve the system laws and regulations to reduce the human accidents in the allocation of resources in the process of entrepreneurship, and create an institutional environment conducive to the promotion of entrepreneurship.

Fund Project

General Topic of Educational Science Planning in Zhejiang Province: Current Situation of College Students’.

Entrepreneurial Intention in the New Era and Education Intervention Strategy Research (2021SCG009); Education and,

Teaching Reform Research Funding Project of Hangzhou Dianzi University: Research on the Cultivation of innovative.

And entrepreneurial Ability of new Engineering Talents in colleges with industrial Characteristics under the background of “Shuang 10,000 Plan”: A case study of Hangzhou Dianzi University (ZDJG202106); Hangzhou Social.

Science Planning project: Current Status Evaluation of Entrepreneurs’ Happiness in the New Era and Research on its.

Promotion Path: Taking Hangzhou as an example (Z21JC097).

References

1. 1. Acs, Z. J., Arenius, P., Hay, M., & Minniti, M. (2004). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2004 Executive Report. Babson College/London Business School. [Paper reference 1]


2. 2. Bosma, N., & Harding, R. (2006). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: GEM 2006 Summary Results. Babson College /London Business School. [Paper reference 1]


3. 3. Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H.-L. (2010). Institutional Theory and Entrepreneurship: Where are We Now and Where Do We Need to Move in the Future? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34, 421-440. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00390.x [Paper reference 1]


4. 4. Chen, G. (2015). Regulation and Entrepreneurship: Micro evidence from China. Management World, No. 5, 89-99. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 4]


5. 5. Chen, G., & Qiu, D. (2021). Confucian Culture and Entrepreneurship: An Epidemiological Study. Research of Finance and Economics, No. 3, 95-109. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


6. 6. Davidsson, P., & Wiklund, J. (1997). Values, Beliefs and Regional Variations in New Firm Formation Rates. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 179-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(97)00004-4 [Paper reference 1]


7. 7. De Bettignies, J.-E., & Brander, J. A. (2007). Financing Entrepreneurship: Bank Finance versus Venture Capital. Journal of Business Venturing, 22, 808-832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.07.005 [Paper reference 1]


8. 8. Djankov, S. (2009). The Regulation of Entry: A Survey. The World Bank Research Observer, 24, 183-203. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkp005 [Paper reference 1]


9. 9. Dreher, A., & Gassebner, M. (2013). Greasing the Wheels of Entrepreneurship? The Impact of Regulation and Corruption on Firm Entry. Public Choice, 115, 413-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-011-9871-2 [Paper reference 1]


10. 10. Du, W. (1997). Modern Spirit and Confucian Tradition. SDX Joint Publishing Company. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


11. 11. Freytag, A., & Thurik, R. (2007). Entrepreneurship and Its Determinants in a Cross-Country Setting. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 17, 117-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-006-0044-2 [Paper reference 1]


12. 12. Gelekanycz, M. A. (1997). The Salience of ‘Culture’s Consequence’: The Effect of Cultural Values on Top Executive Commitment to the Status Quo. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 615-634. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199709)18:8<615::AID-SMJ889>3.0.CO;2-I [Paper reference 1]


13. 13. Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2006). Does Culture Affect Economic Outcomes? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 23-48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.20.2.23 [Paper reference 1]


14. 14. Guo, J., & Luo, P. (2016). Does the Internet Promote China’s Total Factor Productivity. Management World, No. 10, 34-49. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


15. 15. Guo, X.-D. (2007). On the Connotations of Cheng Yi’s “Nature Is Reasoning” and His Gongfu-Theory Orientation. Journal of Yunnan University (Social Sciences Edition), 6, 41-47. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


16. 16. Herzberg, F. (1968). One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees. Harvard Business Review, 46, 53-62. [Paper reference 1]


17. 17. Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences, International Differences in Work Related Values. SAGE Publications. [Paper reference 1]


18. 18. Hofstede, G. (1996). Riding the Waves of Commerce: A Test of Trompenaars’ “Model” of National Culture Differences. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 189-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(96)00003-X [Paper reference 3]


19. 19. Huang, A., & Zheng, Y. (2020).Research on the Influence of the Doctrine of the Mean on the Operating Mechanism of Accounting Conservatism—Based on the Hofstede-Gray Accounting Subculture Framework. Friends of Accounting, No. 12, 146-150. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 4]


20. 20. Huang, L., Sun, X., & Wang, X. (2019). Anti-Corruption and Regional Entrepreneurship: Effect and Influence Mechanism. Economic Management, No. 9, 5-19. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


21. 21. Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. (2005). Institutions and Entrepreneurship. In S.A. Alvarez, R. Agarwal, & O. Sorenson (Eds.), Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research. International Handbook Series on Entrepreneurship (Vol. 2, pp. 201-232). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23622-8_10 [Paper reference 1]


22. 22. Jansson, H., Johanson, M., & Ramstromc, J. (2007). Institutions and Business Networks: A Comparative Analysis of the Chinese, Russian, and West European Markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 36, 955-967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.05.013 [Paper reference 1]


23. 23. Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial Discovery and the Competitive Market Process: An Austrian Approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 60-85. [Paper reference 1]


24. 24. Klapper, L., Laeven, L., & Rajan, R. (2006). Entry Regulation as a Barrier to Entrepreneurship. Journal of Financial of Economics, 82, 591-629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2005.09.006 [Paper reference 1]


25. 25. Li, J., & Li, J. (2020). Inclusive Finance and Entrepreneurship: “Teaching People to Fish” or “Teaching People to Fish”. Finance Research, No. 1, 69-87. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


26. 26. Li, X., & Huang, H. (2014). A Revolution of Control Right upon Clan Enterprise. Academic Research, No. 11, 21-24. (In Chinese)


27. 27. Luo, M., & Li, L. (2015). The Innovation of Business Model in Internet Era: From Value Creation Perspective. China Industrial Economics, No. 1, 95-107. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


28. 28. Max, W. (2010). Confucianism and Taoism. Translated by Hong Tianfu. Jiangsu People’s Publishing House. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


29. 29. McMillan, J., & Woodruff, C. (2002). The Central Role of Entrepreneurs in Transition Economies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, 153-170. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533002760278767 [Paper reference 1]


30. 30. McMullan, J. S., & Shepherd, D. A. (2006). Entrepreneurial Action and the Role of Uncertainty in the Theory of the Entrepreneur. Academy of Management Review, 31, 132-152. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.19379628 [Paper reference 1]


31. 31. Miao, J. W. (2018). Analysis of Poverty Reduction Effect of Inclusive Finance. National Circulation Economy, No. 2, 52-53. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


32. 32. Morris, M. H., Avila, R. A., & Allen, J. (1993). Individualism and the Modern Corporation: Implications for Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, 19, 595-612. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639301900305 [Paper reference 1]


33. 33. Muller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2000). Culture and Entrepreneurial Potential: A Nine Country Study of Locus of Control and Innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 51-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00039-7 [Paper reference 1]


34. 34. North, D. C. (2005). Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton University Press. [Paper reference 1]


35. 35. Pigou (2007). Welfare Economics. Huaxia Publishing House. [Paper reference 1]


36. 36. Qi, F. (2016). An Empirical Study on the Influence of Differences in Communication Factors of Employees in Chinese and Vietnamese Enterprises on Communication Effect—Taking Masculine-Feminine Temperament as the Moderating Variable. MSc. Thesis, Guangxi University. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 2]


37. 37. Reynolds P. D., Bygrave, W. D., Autio, E., & Others, A. (2003). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2003 Executive Report. London Business School. [Paper reference 1]


38. 38. Schloesser, O., Frese, M. et al. (2010). Humane Orientation as a New Cultural Dimension of the GLOBE Project: A Validation Study of the GLOBE Scale and Out-Group Humane Orientation in 25 Countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44, 535-551. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022112465671 [Paper reference 1]


39. 39. Shane, S. (1995). Uncertainty Avoidance and the Preference for Innovation Championing Roles. Journal of International Business Studies, 26, 47-68. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490165 [Paper reference 1]


40. 40. Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1993). Corruption. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 599-617. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118402 [Paper reference 1]


41. 41. Tian, Z. (2020). Collectivism and Household Consumption: New Empirical Evidence from China. Journal of Financial Research, No. 5, 132-150. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 2]


42. 42. Wei, S. (2011). Theory of Zhongyong Collection. Li River Publishing House. [Paper reference 1]


43. 43. Xin, K., & Pearce, J. (1996). Guanxi: Connections as Substitutes for Formal Institutional Support. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1641-1658. [Paper reference 1]


44. 44. Xin, Y., Xu, L, & Li, X. (2014). Institutional Environment Evaluation, Shareholding and Happiness of China's Private Business Entrepreneurs. Nankai Business Review, 17, 14-25. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


45. 45. Xu, J. (2013). The Influence of Culture on College Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention. Journal of Ningbo Vocational and Technical College, No. 3, 17-21. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


46. 46. Ye, W., Yang, X., & Zhu, H. (2018). Does Entrepreneurial Activity Affect Happiness? A Comparative Study Based on National Culture and Institutional Environment. Nankai Business Review, 21, 4-14. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


47. 47. Zhang, H., Yin, Z., & Peng, C. (2017). Financial Inclusion and Urban Residents’ Unemployment in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region: Evidence from CHFS Data. Economics and Management Research, 38, 61-71. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


48. 48. Zhao, T., Zhang, Z., & Liang, S. (2020). Digital Economy, Entrepreneurship, and High-Quality Economic Development: Empirical Evidence from Urban China. Management World, 36, 65-76. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]


49. 49. Zhao, X., Li, H., & Rauch, A. (2012). The Differences among Countries(Regions) in Entrepreneurial Activity: The Interaction Effect between Culture and the Level of a Country(Regions)’s Economic Growth. Management World, No. 8, 78-90. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 4]


50. 50. Zhao, X.-Y., Frese, M., & Giardini, A. (2010). Business Owners’ Network Size and Business Growth in China: The Role of Comprehensive Social Competency. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22, 675-705. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620903171376 [Paper reference 1]


51. 51. Zhou, G., & Liang, Q. (2018). Internet Usage, Market Frictions and Household Investment on Risky Financial Assets. Journal of Financial Research, No. 1, 84-101. (In Chinese) [Paper reference 1]

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References

[1]	Acs, Z. J., Arenius, P., Hay, M., & Minniti, M. (2004). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: 2004 Executive Report. Babson College/London Business School.
[2]	Bosma, N., & Harding, R. (2006). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor: GEM 2006 Summary Results. Babson College /London Business School.
[3]	Bruton, G. D., Ahlstrom, D., & Li, H.-L. (2010). Institutional Theory and Entrepreneurship: Where are We Now and Where Do We Need to Move in the Future? Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 34, 421-440. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6520.2010.00390.x
[4]	Chen, G. (2015). Regulation and Entrepreneurship: Micro evidence from China. Management World, No. 5, 89-99. (In Chinese)
[5]	Chen, G., & Qiu, D. (2021). Confucian Culture and Entrepreneurship: An Epidemiological Study. Research of Finance and Economics, No. 3, 95-109. (In Chinese)
[6]	Davidsson, P., & Wiklund, J. (1997). Values, Beliefs and Regional Variations in New Firm Formation Rates. Journal of Economic Psychology, 18, 179-199. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-4870(97)00004-4
[7]	De Bettignies, J.-E., & Brander, J. A. (2007). Financing Entrepreneurship: Bank Finance versus Venture Capital. Journal of Business Venturing, 22, 808-832. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2006.07.005
[8]	Djankov, S. (2009). The Regulation of Entry: A Survey. The World Bank Research Observer, 24, 183-203. https://doi.org/10.1093/wbro/lkp005
[9]	Dreher, A., & Gassebner, M. (2013). Greasing the Wheels of Entrepreneurship? The Impact of Regulation and Corruption on Firm Entry. Public Choice, 115, 413-432. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11127-011-9871-2
[10]	Du, W. (1997). Modern Spirit and Confucian Tradition. SDX Joint Publishing Company. (In Chinese)
[11]	Freytag, A., & Thurik, R. (2007). Entrepreneurship and Its Determinants in a Cross-Country Setting. Journal of Evolutionary Economics, 17, 117-131. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00191-006-0044-2
[12]	Gelekanycz, M. A. (1997). The Salience of ‘Culture’s Consequence’: The Effect of Cultural Values on Top Executive Commitment to the Status Quo. Strategic Management Journal, 18, 615-634. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0266(199709)18:8<615::AID-SMJ889>3.0.CO;2-I
[13]	Guiso, L., Sapienza, P., & Zingales, L. (2006). Does Culture Affect Economic Outcomes? Journal of Economic Perspectives, 20, 23-48. https://doi.org/10.1257/jep.20.2.23
[14]	Guo, J., & Luo, P. (2016). Does the Internet Promote China’s Total Factor Productivity. Management World, No. 10, 34-49. (In Chinese)
[15]	Guo, X.-D. (2007). On the Connotations of Cheng Yi’s “Nature Is Reasoning” and His Gongfu-Theory Orientation. Journal of Yunnan University (Social Sciences Edition), 6, 41-47. (In Chinese)
[16]	Herzberg, F. (1968). One More Time: How Do You Motivate Employees. Harvard Business Review, 46, 53-62.
[17]	Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture’s Consequences, International Differences in Work Related Values. SAGE Publications.
[18]	Hofstede, G. (1996). Riding the Waves of Commerce: A Test of Trompenaars’ “Model” of National Culture Differences. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 20, 189-198. https://doi.org/10.1016/0147-1767(96)00003-X
[19]	Huang, A., & Zheng, Y. (2020).Research on the Influence of the Doctrine of the Mean on the Operating Mechanism of Accounting Conservatism—Based on the Hofstede-Gray Accounting Subculture Framework. Friends of Accounting, No. 12, 146-150. (In Chinese)
[20]	Huang, L., Sun, X., & Wang, X. (2019). Anti-Corruption and Regional Entrepreneurship: Effect and Influence Mechanism. Economic Management, No. 9, 5-19. (In Chinese)
[21]	Hwang, H., & Powell, W. W. (2005). Institutions and Entrepreneurship. In S.A. Alvarez, R. Agarwal, & O. Sorenson (Eds.), Handbook of Entrepreneurship Research. International Handbook Series on Entrepreneurship (Vol. 2, pp. 201-232). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/0-387-23622-8_10
[22]	Jansson, H., Johanson, M., & Ramstromc, J. (2007). Institutions and Business Networks: A Comparative Analysis of the Chinese, Russian, and West European Markets. Industrial Marketing Management, 36, 955-967. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indmarman.2007.05.013
[23]	Kirzner, I. M. (1997). Entrepreneurial Discovery and the Competitive Market Process: An Austrian Approach. Journal of Economic Literature, 35, 60-85.
[24]	Klapper, L., Laeven, L., & Rajan, R. (2006). Entry Regulation as a Barrier to Entrepreneurship. Journal of Financial of Economics, 82, 591-629. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfineco.2005.09.006
[25]	Li, J., & Li, J. (2020). Inclusive Finance and Entrepreneurship: “Teaching People to Fish” or “Teaching People to Fish”. Finance Research, No. 1, 69-87. (In Chinese)
[26]	Li, X., & Huang, H. (2014). A Revolution of Control Right upon Clan Enterprise. Academic Research, No. 11, 21-24. (In Chinese)
[27]	Luo, M., & Li, L. (2015). The Innovation of Business Model in Internet Era: From Value Creation Perspective. China Industrial Economics, No. 1, 95-107. (In Chinese)
[28]	Max, W. (2010). Confucianism and Taoism. Translated by Hong Tianfu. Jiangsu People’s Publishing House. (In Chinese)
[29]	McMillan, J., & Woodruff, C. (2002). The Central Role of Entrepreneurs in Transition Economies. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 16, 153-170. https://doi.org/10.1257/089533002760278767
[30]	McMullan, J. S., & Shepherd, D. A. (2006). Entrepreneurial Action and the Role of Uncertainty in the Theory of the Entrepreneur. Academy of Management Review, 31, 132-152. https://doi.org/10.5465/amr.2006.19379628
[31]	Miao, J. W. (2018). Analysis of Poverty Reduction Effect of Inclusive Finance. National Circulation Economy, No. 2, 52-53. (In Chinese)
[32]	Morris, M. H., Avila, R. A., & Allen, J. (1993). Individualism and the Modern Corporation: Implications for Innovation and Entrepreneurship. Journal of Management, 19, 595-612. https://doi.org/10.1177/014920639301900305
[33]	Muller, S. L., & Thomas, A. S. (2000). Culture and Entrepreneurial Potential: A Nine Country Study of Locus of Control and Innovativeness. Journal of Business Venturing, 16, 51-75. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0883-9026(99)00039-7
[34]	North, D. C. (2005). Understanding the Process of Economic Change. Princeton University Press.
[35]	Pigou (2007). Welfare Economics. Huaxia Publishing House.
[36]	Qi, F. (2016). An Empirical Study on the Influence of Differences in Communication Factors of Employees in Chinese and Vietnamese Enterprises on Communication Effect—Taking Masculine-Feminine Temperament as the Moderating Variable. MSc. Thesis, Guangxi University. (In Chinese)
[37]	Reynolds P. D., Bygrave, W. D., Autio, E., & Others, A. (2003). Global Entrepreneurship Monitor 2003 Executive Report. London Business School.
[38]	Schloesser, O., Frese, M. et al. (2010). Humane Orientation as a New Cultural Dimension of the GLOBE Project: A Validation Study of the GLOBE Scale and Out-Group Humane Orientation in 25 Countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 44, 535-551. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022112465671
[39]	Shane, S. (1995). Uncertainty Avoidance and the Preference for Innovation Championing Roles. Journal of International Business Studies, 26, 47-68. https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.jibs.8490165
[40]	Shleifer, A., & Vishny, R. W. (1993). Corruption. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108, 599-617. https://doi.org/10.2307/2118402
[41]	Tian, Z. (2020). Collectivism and Household Consumption: New Empirical Evidence from China. Journal of Financial Research, No. 5, 132-150. (In Chinese)
[42]	Wei, S. (2011). Theory of Zhongyong Collection. Li River Publishing House.
[43]	Xin, K., & Pearce, J. (1996). Guanxi: Connections as Substitutes for Formal Institutional Support. Academy of Management Journal, 39, 1641-1658.
[44]	Xin, Y., Xu, L, & Li, X. (2014). Institutional Environment Evaluation, Shareholding and Happiness of China's Private Business Entrepreneurs. Nankai Business Review, 17, 14-25. (In Chinese)
[45]	Xu, J. (2013). The Influence of Culture on College Students’ Entrepreneurial Intention. Journal of Ningbo Vocational and Technical College, No. 3, 17-21. (In Chinese)
[46]	Ye, W., Yang, X., & Zhu, H. (2018). Does Entrepreneurial Activity Affect Happiness? A Comparative Study Based on National Culture and Institutional Environment. Nankai Business Review, 21, 4-14. (In Chinese)
[47]	Zhang, H., Yin, Z., & Peng, C. (2017). Financial Inclusion and Urban Residents’ Unemployment in Beijing-Tianjin-Hebei Region: Evidence from CHFS Data. Economics and Management Research, 38, 61-71. (In Chinese)
[48]	Zhao, T., Zhang, Z., & Liang, S. (2020). Digital Economy, Entrepreneurship, and High-Quality Economic Development: Empirical Evidence from Urban China. Management World, 36, 65-76. (In Chinese)
[49]	Zhao, X., Li, H., & Rauch, A. (2012). The Differences among Countries(Regions) in Entrepreneurial Activity: The Interaction Effect between Culture and the Level of a Country(Regions)’s Economic Growth. Management World, No. 8, 78-90. (In Chinese)
[50]	Zhao, X.-Y., Frese, M., & Giardini, A. (2010). Business Owners’ Network Size and Business Growth in China: The Role of Comprehensive Social Competency. Entrepreneurship & Regional Development, 22, 675-705. https://doi.org/10.1080/08985620903171376
[51]	Zhou, G., & Liang, Q. (2018). Internet Usage, Market Frictions and Household Investment on Risky Financial Assets. Journal of Financial Research, No. 1, 84-101. (In Chinese)