**INVESTIGATION ON ENTREPRENEURSHIP DEVELOPMENT
CHALLENGES IN FISHCULTURE ENTERPRISES. CASE STUDY: IRAN
Safa Farrokhi
Islamic Azad university, Ilam branch.
[email protected]
Mohamad Chizari
Professor of agricultural Extension. University of Tarbiat modares
Homaun Moradnejadi
Assistant professor of Agricultural Extension. University of Ilam.
Abstract
Entrepreneurship is one of approaches that can play a promotive role in Iran agricultural
development process. This study is carried out to identify and analyze challenges that
entrepreneurship development in the fishculture enterprises is faced in Ilam province of Iran. A
qualitative method including In-depth interview, reports documentation and factor analysis was
used as the methodology of this study. Using Cochran determining sample formula and
systematic sampling technique, 12 entrepreneurs of fishculture as the key informants were
selected. Coronbach Alpha coefficient was used in order to determine the questionnaire’s
reliability was to be to equal %81. Data analysis was accomplished using Triangulation
technique and records interpretation. Results from Triangulation technique and records
interpretation indicated that the lack of professional knowledge lack of technical knowledge for
initiation, unpredictable increasing input’s price and weakness in governmental monetary and
administrational supports are the main challenges in entrepreneurship development of the
fishculture enterprises. According to findings, for the entrepreneurship development in the
fishculture enterprises, professional educations as the most important factor should be
considered.
Key words: Entrepreneurship development, Fishculture, Enterprises, Challenges.
1
Introduction
In 1950 and 1960 decades, when the growth rate was the most important matter for economic
development, no sufficient attention was paid by development theoricians and policy makers to
agricultural sector as an important factor in development process. Nowadays, by publication
many books and articles, this traditional paradigm has been changed. As an example, an article
published in 1961 titled “Agriculture role in economic development” by Johnstone and Miller.
After that the condition changed by increasing attention of economists to promotive role of
Agriculture sector in economic development.
In developing countries such as Iran because majority of people’s livelihood rely on agriculture,
this role is more important than other countries. In Iran agriculture sector, to commercialize and
to be harmonious with competitive world markets, achieving a continuous, acceptable growth
rate, to move forward sustainable agriculture and to overcome the issues and challenges such as
high rate of unemployment, low rate of efficiency and productivity, lack of water resources,
decreasing per capita farming lands and scattered farming lands, a comprehensive planning and
policy making is very essential. (Curran & Blackburn, 2001).
In order to solve the above issues, development of commercialized agricultural enterprises is
needed and it requires the extended new entrepreneurial activities. Clearly there are two major
objects that should to be considered in selecting appropriate field for extension of entrepreneurial
new activities. a) Internal condition of agricultural sector such as 1) Structural conditions
(utilization system, climate, human recourses), 2) Institutional conditions and b) External
conditions such as global markets, competitive situations, National and international policies
(Smith, 2004; Knudson, 2004).
Based on Iranian agriculture sector condition, fishculture enterprise is one of appropriate fields
for extension of entrepreneurial activities. There are some advantages of fishculture enterprises
development; Providing effective occupations, increasing internal production and helping GNP,
high net income, diversity in production, better utilization of water resources and uncultivable
lands. Evidence shows that entrepreneurship development in fishculture enterprises is facing
some challenges which can make it slow and difficult to fulfill the planned goals.Therefore,
identifying the main challenges in this field is very important.
Two research questions are 1) what are the main challenges that entrepreneurship development
process in fishculture enterprises is faced them?
2) What are the essential operations to remove them?
There are three types of challenge in entrepreneurship development: Structural, Environmental
and Individual challenges. Structural challenges refer to managerial support, time opportunity,
Incentive systems, entrepreneurship teams development, and giving over the authority.
Environmental challenges refer to socio-economic conditions, entrepreneurship and enterprise
skills, financial and non-financial contributions. Individual challenges refer to tolerance of
ambiguity, endurance, need for achievement, risk taking propensity, internal locus of control
(Moradnejadi, 2006; parcel & Sykutau, 2003). Based on (Simith, 2004; Chouke & Armstrong,
2000; Wiklund & Shepherd, 2005), lack of professional knowledge, expensive road
transportation, Marketing difficulties are the main challenges in agricultural enterprises. Bielik
2
and Beno (2002) investigated on selected problems of agricultural business entrepreneurship in
Slovakia. In this study two types of problems were identified. They have been well documented
that the first type of problems (General) refers to climatic and agroecologic conditions and the
second one (Typical) refers to consumption market, products warehousing, very competitive
market and seasonal limitation and aerial transportation.
Methodology
This research is carried out using qualitative methods such as triangulation, records interpretation
and structural equation model. To have a better analyze of findings, factor analysis as one of the
quantitative methods was used. Using Cochran determining sample formula and systematic
sampling technique, 12 entrepreneurs of fishculture as the key informants were selected.
Cronbach Alpha coefficient that was used in order to determine the semi structured
questionnaire’s reliability was equal to %81. Data were collected through the in-depth
interviews.
Results
After the in-depth interview with respondents, the primary list of challenges was developed and
using the interpretation of data, the list was finalized. In this phase, the first number of
challenges increased from 16 to 25. The final ranked list is as below.
Table 1
The final ranked list of challenges
Challenges in fishculture enterprises
Mean
- Lack of professional Knowledge for production
- Lack of technical Knowledge for initiation
- Unpredictable increasing inputs price
- Weakness in governmental monetary supports
-Weakness in governmental administrative supports
- Unwidely regulations for gain access to loans
- Nonexistence of extension and educational programs
- Inadequacy of capital and being rely on Bank loans
- Low productivity in production process
- High rate interest of loans
- The lack of consultative services
- Difficulties in inputs preparation
- High risk for mortality during production period
- Existence of local oppositions and their endangerments
- Need to high revolving capital
- lack of well trained and skillful workers
- Lack of some technical equipments
- Absence of entrepreneurship development educational
courses.
- Absence of union or syndicate
- Low rate of production profit
- Expensive transportation
C.V.
Rank
6/95
6/72
6/79
6/36
6/32
6/18
6/42
5/71
5/14
5/21
4/90
6/17
5/11
4/61
5/02
4/27
4/14
3/92
Std.
Dev.
1/17
1/29
1/52
1/61
1/92
1/56
1/82
2/09
2/23
2/17
2/52
2/67
2/93
2/62
2/84
3/11
3/17
3/28
0/15
0/17
0/21
0/24
0/29
0/31
0/36
0/41
0/43
0/45
0/50
0/51
0/51
0/52
0/54
0/54
0/54
0/61
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
4/39
4/20
3/69
3/28
3/41
3/53
0/66
0/68
0/68
19
20
21
3
- Limitation in diverse production because of consumer’s 3/69
gestations
- Water resources pollution
3/30
- Road transportation weaknesses
3/19
- Long production period
3/11
3/62
0/75
22
3/67
3/81
3/87
0/83
0/89
0/96
23
24
25
Based on the table (1), the lack of professional knowledge for production, the lack of technical
knowledge for initiation of fishculture enterprises, unpredictable increasing input prices and
weaknesses in governmental monetary and administrative supports are the most important
challenges that entrepreneurship development in fishculture enterprises is facing. (rank 1-5),
while the five challenges at the end of List are the Least important ones, (rank 21-25).
This conclusion is borne up by numerous studies, more specifically those of Moradnejadi (2006)
and Bielik & Beno (2002).
Factor analysis was used to have a better analyzed. K.M.O
coefficient and Bartlett’s criterion showed that the data were appropriate to factor analysis. Using
Kaiser Criterion, the number of factors was determined. Varimax method for rotation of factors
was used to simplify and to increase the interpretability of factors. Title of factors, Eigenvalue,
percent of variance and cumulative percent are given in table (2).
Table 2
Title, Eigenvalue, Pec. of var and Cum Pec. of factors
Factors
Eigenvalue
Pec. of var
Lack of knowledge and educational
4/27
22/35
services
Lack of appropriate support
3/17
18/40
Lack of essential infrastructures
1/26
16/12
Cum pec.
22/35
40/75
56/87
As a result in table (2), Lack of knowledge and educational services, Lack of appropriate support
and Lack of essential infrastructures as the main three factors show the %56/87 of total variation
of changes affected the entrepreneurship development in fishculture enterprises. Interestingly,
this is the same conclusion that Moradnejadi found in his study of factors influencing
entrepreneurship development in the greenhouse enterprises in Iran. Thus, according to these
findings, for the entrepreneurship development in fishculture enterprises, the following as the
most important activities should be considered:
a) Providing professional and technical
educations b) Providing sustainable inputs market and c) Strengthening the government
multilateral supports.
References
- Bielik, P., & Beno, D. (2002). Analysis of the Selected Problems of Agricultural Business
Entrepreneurship in Slovakia, AGRIC. E CON, 48, 2002(5): 225-232.
- Chouke, R., & Armstrong, R. (2000). Culture: A Missing Perspective on Small and MediumSized Enterprises Development. International journal of Entrepreneurship Behavior and
Research, Vol.6. No.4. pp. 227-238.
- Curran, J., & Blackburn, R.A. (2001). Researching the Small Enterprise, Sag, London.
- Knudson, S. (2004). Entrepreneurship and Innovation in the Agri-Food System. Amer. J. Agr.
E con. NO.S. 1330-1336.
4
- Moradnejadi, H. (2006). Analysis of Factor Influencing Entrepreneurship Development in the
Greenhouse Enterprises in Iran. Tehran. University of Tehran.
- Parcel, J., & Sykutau, M. (2003). Undergraduate Perceptions of the Need for an Agricultural
Entrepreneurship.
- Smith, B. (2004). Changing External Conditions Require Levels of Entrepreneurship in
Agriculture submitted to Acta horticulture.
- Wiklund, J., & shepherd, D. (2005). Entrepreneurial Orientation and Small Business
Performance: A Configurational Approach. Journal of Business Venturing Vo. 20. pp. 71-91.
5