Introduction
There is a growing sociological inquiry into the possible reasons as to why certain ethnic groups produce, on average, more entrepreneurs than others. Sociology has long explored the number and nature of entrepreneurial roles that exist in a society, as well as the objective structure that underlies economic opportunities and the social structure of entrepreneurial decision-making processes (Thornton 1999; Ruef and Lounsbury 2007).
This approach takes into strong consideration embeddedness theory (Granovetter 2005; Krippner and Alvarez 2007). What has been missing in sociology, however, is the development of a theor y of human action, especially entrepreneurial action, in the market. Starting with the Kirznerian conception of entrepreneurship and Austrian market process theory is an ideal approach. The Kirznerian model considers entrepreneurship as a process of alertness and discovery regarding opportunities for entrepreneurial profit (Kirzner 1973). This model is among the few conceptions of entrepreneurship that, under theS. Kouassi (B)
Goethe University, Frankfurt, Germany
© The Author(s) 2021 67
A. John and D. W. Thomas (eds.), Entrepreneurship and the Market
Process, Mercatus Studies in Political and Social Economy, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-42408-4_4
opportunity-discovery nexus, found general agreement and application across disciplines over the last decades, and made key contributions to the understanding of the critical role entrepreneurship plays in markets (Shane and Venkataraman 2000; Alvarez and Barney 2007; Klein 2008).
The cognitive-behavioural aspect of the Kirznerian model presents an interesting object of study for sociology, particularly in terms of exploring the cultural determinants in the processes of identifying, evaluating and exploiting entrepreneurial opportunities. in that constellation, culture, for instance, shapes what individuals perceive as opportunities and, thereby, what they overlook (Kirzner 2006).
The present work addresses the topic of culture and entrepreneurship and attempts to further develop the Austrian market and culture programme. This is accomplished by exploring how ethnic shared mental models play an important role in the alertness and opportunity discovery process, and developing a model that fits with said process; one which I call the Kirznerian-ethnic- entrepreneur. This work derives from, and evolves within, the established common ground between Austrian economics and mainline sociology. This common ground relies on a Weberian interpretive understanding of the meanings that individuals attach to their actions, their social environment and the cultural significance of economic phenomena, and embeddedness theory (Granovetter 1985; Lavoie 1991; Swedberg 1997; Langrill and Storr 2015; Chamlee-Wright and Storr 2015). In between Austrian economics and sociology lies a window of opportunity for finally understanding entrepreneurial behaviour and how entrepreneurship takes place. This window applies to sociology in particular because it has, until now, failed in its pursuits of such an understanding and the development of a cohesive theory of entrepreneurship (Schumpeter 1954; Swedberg 2009). Furthermore, sociology has been even less able to theorize the entrepreneur as the central actor and driver of the market. The state of the field being such, this work provides an opportunity to gain valuable insight into this under-researched area, while developing an extended and practical model of the Kirznerian entrepreneur. The developed model is based on two assumptions: first, it is based on the ubiquitous character of markets as they emerge everywhere, and second, it relies on the fact that market complexity is rooted in the history and culture of the respective societies. The model therefore responds to the need to further develop existing entrepreneurship theories, while also examining the specific local cultural contexts (Lavoie and Chamlee-Wright 2000: 54). Another shortage this model responds to is the lack of analytical perspectives in sociology, particularly on how actors concretely use culture, and how cultural elements constrain or facilitate patterns of action (Swidler 1986: 284).in the present case, ethnicity is the most practical device to make sense of culture. The present model helps one to understand the pattern of meanings that shape the identification and assessment of opportunities, and the means by which these opportunities are exploited. it therefore contributes to the sociological literature by emphasizing how culture drives alertness in the process of coping with local market uncertainties and sheer ignorance, as well as emphasizing the manifestation of an embedded modus operandi about how to practically seize and exploit those opportunities. While introducing Bourdieu's (1977) sociological concept of the habitus in the present model, we have a much more complete action-scheme framework to make clearer sense of alertness and opportunity discovery, but also reconcile micro versus macro and subjective versus objective perspectives in sociology.
My model of the Kirznerian-ethnic-entrepreneur is similar to the “market-born-and-bred groups of men” (Geertz 1963: 26), highlighted some decades ago by Clifford Geertz while in Indonesia, but still observable in the bazaar-like-economies of many developing nations today. The present model theorizes also the so-called “informal economy” of those countries as a traditional market order; they are a product of the local cultural process (Ayittey 2006). The model has the potential for a better understanding of entrepreneurship in developing economies and goes through a realignment of ethnic entrepreneurship in general, and a discussion of entrepreneurial processes in the African traditional market order in particular. It addresses the nature of that market, past and present developments, and the possible challenges resulting from the entrepreneurial process it entails—a process characterized by the existence of formal economic institutions within a culture that did not necessarily create them.