Policy Transparency and Financial Accessibility: How Government Financial Policies Influence Entrepreneurial Attitudes and Intentions
Jui-Sheng Wang
Graduate Institute of Finance,
National Cheng Kung University, Taiwan
Juishengwang1995@gmail.com
ORCHID: 0009-0005-1599-5236
Abstract
Entrepreneurial activity is closely linked to a nation's economic development, and entrepreneurial intention is a crucial prerequisite for creating new ventures. Therefore, enhancing the entrepreneurial intentions of potential entrepreneurs is essential when it comes to fostering entrepreneurial activity. This study examines the relationship between government financial policies, entrepreneurial attitudes, and entrepreneurial intentions. Through empirical analysis, the study validates the interactions and mechanisms of influence among these factors.
The sample for this study consists of participants in the 2024 Youth Entrepreneurship Incubation Program organized by Taiwan’s Youth Development Administration. Questionnaires were distributed to participants from seven counties. During the data collection, 50 questionnaires were allocated per county. The participants were selected using convenience sampling and the questionnaire was distributed physically. A total of 350 questionnaires were distributed. Of these 337 were valid, resulting in an effective response rate of 96%.The results indicate that the three dimensions of government financial policies—financial accessibility, policy transparency, and support intensity—play significant roles in enhancing entrepreneurs' psychological tendencies and behavioral intentions. Among these, policy transparency has the most notable impact on entrepreneurial attitudes. This shows that clear and predictable policy content strengthens entrepreneurs' trust and their motivation to act. The intensity of support and financial accessibility contribute directly to the formation of entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions by alleviating financial pressures and providing additional entrepreneurial resources. By integrating the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Entrepreneurial Event Model, this study expands the application scope of these theories in the context of policy and entrepreneurial behavior research. The findings provide practical recommendations for government policymakers and entrepreneurship education institutions. The recommendations were deemed particularly valuable regarding the optimization of policy transparency, financial support, and entrepreneurial training with significant implications for practice.
Keywords: Government Financial Policies, Entrepreneurial Attitudes, Entrepreneurial Intentions
Introduction
In an era of rapidly changing global economies and increasing interconnectedness, entrepreneurship is widely regarded as a vital driver of economic growth and social prosperity. Whether in economically advanced nations or resource-constrained developing countries, entrepreneurship remains a critical topic. The success of entrepreneurial activities not only directly increases employment opportunities but also fosters technological innovation and market diversification. According to the World Bank, the share of startups in global economic activity has been steadily increasing. In addition, in some developing nations, they have become key factors in economic recovery. Entrepreneurial intentions and attitudes are often influenced by multiple factors, including individual traits, social environments, and policy support. Among these, government-provided financial policies—such as startup grants, trade incentives, and tax reductions—play a pivotal role in promoting entrepreneurial activity. These policies not only provide direct financial assistance to entrepreneurs but also inspire more people to become entrepreneurs by reducing operational risks and costs.
Existing research indicates that nearly all psychological and sociological studies suggest individual entrepreneurial intentions are mainly shaped by a person’s educational background, social networks, and financial independence. For instance, Ajzen's (1991) Theory of Planned Behavior posits that the formation of entrepreneurial intentions largely depends on attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control, all of which can be influenced by external policy environments. However, gaps remain to this day in understanding how government financial policies specifically impact entrepreneurial intentions. Related studies often focus on topics such as financial technology, targeted subsidies, and entrepreneurial success rates, but they lack a systematic analysis of the fundamental drivers of entrepreneurial intentions and the role of financial policies. Furthermore, current discussions on financial policies tend to emphasize their macro-level outcomes, such as economic growth indicators and increases in the number of startups. However, individual-level studies—examining factors like entrepreneurs' risk preferences, self-efficacy, and social cognition—are relatively underexplored. This has led to policy designs that may not fully address the specific needs of entrepreneurs at the practical execution level.
While governments have introduced various support measures, including startup funds, tax incentives, and technology incubators, sparking a wave of entrepreneurial activity, the effectiveness and real impact of these policies need to be further reviewed. At the local government level, significant differences in policy implementation and resource allocation across regions result in diverse impacts on entrepreneurial intentions. A thorough understanding of how government financial policies influence entrepreneurs’ attitudes and intentions will help policymakers design more effective and targeted measures to maximize entrepreneurial activity. This study aims to provide actionable recommendations for policymakers to enhance the effectiveness of policies and also promote the sustainable development of entrepreneurship. Despite the array of financial support offered by governments, there is a lack of systematic and quantitative evidence to confirm whether these measures effectively enhance individual entrepreneurial activity. The impact of financial policies on entrepreneurial intentions extends beyond statistical data to encompass individual cognition and environmental factors. A more comprehensive analytical model is needed to integrate policy effects with individual psychological mechanisms. For example, does tax reduction improve entrepreneurs' risk tolerance? Does the provision of grants enhance entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions? While existing literature mentions government support and entrepreneurial backgrounds, there is a lack of detailed exploration and explanation of the relationship between financial policies and individual entrepreneurial intentions.
With the growing body of research on entrepreneurship, most studies focus on individual policies or localized effects, lacking systematic evaluations of how different financial policies collectively influence entrepreneurial intentions and attitudes. Additionally, current research often falls short when it comes to addressing individual-level psychological mechanisms, such as risk preferences and self-efficacy when exploring the impact of financial policies. This study investigates the impact of government financial policies on entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions, aiming to systematically analyze the direct and indirect effects of these policies on entrepreneurial intentions and attitudes. The study seeks to identify the best practices for policy combinations by introducing psychological and behavioral models to examine how financial policies influence individual psychological factors, ultimately altering entrepreneurial intentions. The findings aim to provide empirical support for optimizing policy design.
Literature Review
(1) Government Financial Policies
Wang et al. (2023) analyzed how governments utilize fiscal and monetary policies to address economic shocks.They define financial policies as a series of government interventions aimed at stabilizing the economy, including interest rate adjustments, credit support programs, and tax incentives. The authors emphasized the importance of adaptability in policy design and implementation efficiency in mitigating economic fluctuations. Petighin S. (2024) (2020) studied government financial policies during the COVID-19 pandemic, defining them as fiscal measures to support business continuity and entrepreneurial activities, such as subsidies, loan guarantees, and tax deferrals. They noted that the effectiveness of these policies depends on their level of targeting and implementation transparency.
Agyapong and Abaidoo (2022) discussed financial policy frameworks in emerging economies, defining them as strategic tools for promoting economic development, including capital market reforms, financial technology support, and targeted funding for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). The authors also suggested that such policies must balance growth and stability. Slepov and Pivnyk (2021) defined financial policies as fiscal interventions targeting specific industries or regions, aimed at reducing income inequality and promoting regional economic balance. Their research highlighted the need for policies to align closely with local economic demands to be effective.Horváth and Vaško (2016) explored central bank interventions during crises, defining financial policies as tools for maintaining market stability and supporting liquidity. These include asset purchase programs and short-term credit facilities. Vesal et al. (2024) conducted a comparative study on post-pandemic financial policies. The researchers defined them as comprehensive measures for economic recovery, including items such as employment stimulus programs, debt relief, and capital market liquidity support. Demydiuk et al. (2022) examined the impact of government financial support on entrepreneurial activities, defining government financial policies as fiscal resources and incentives provided by governments. These include grants, loan guarantees, and tax benefits, designed to promote the establishment and growth of new businesses. Their study found significant variations in the effectiveness of these policies across countries and regions, depending on policy design and implementation efficiency.
Nayak and Rajasekharan (2024) investigated the role of government financial policies in promoting entrepreneurship in emerging economies, and they defined them as measures taken by governments to reduce entrepreneurial barriers, provide financial support, and create a favorable environment for entrepreneurship. The study highlighted the positive impact of both direct financial support (e.g., startup loans) and indirect policies (e.g., improvements in financial infrastructure) on entrepreneurial activities.Tuznik and Jasinski (2022) analyzed the impact of government financial incentives on women entrepreneurs, defining government financial policies as funding and incentive programs specifically targeting female entrepreneurs, such as women’s entrepreneurship funds and specialized loan programs. The study concluded that these policies play a significant role in increasing women’s entrepreneurship rates. However, their effectiveness can be influenced by cultural and social factors. Gupta et al. (2023) highlighted the impact of government financial policies on startup survival rates, defining them as fiscal support and risk mitigation measures provided by governments, including startup grants, tax reductions, and venture capital incentives. The study revealed that appropriate financial policies significantly enhance the survival rate of startups, particularly during the early stages of business development. Ahodode et al. (2024) explored the impact of government financial policies on innovation in startups, defining them as fiscal support and incentives provided to promote the development of innovative startups, such as R&D grants, innovation loans, and tax credits. The study noted that industries respond differently to these policies, emphasizing the need for policy designs to consider industry-specific characteristics to enhance effectiveness.
(2) Theoretical Applications
This study applies the following theoretical frameworks:
1.Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)
Proposed by Ajzen (1991), the TPB posits that behavioral intention is the immediate antecedent of behavior, influenced by three key constructs:
Application to Entrepreneurship: Government financial policies can enhance entrepreneurial intentions by improving perceived behavioral control (e.g., providing financial support) and shifting attitudes (e.g., reducing the perceived risks of entrepreneurship).
2.Social Cognitive Theory (SCT)
Bandura (1986) emphasized the importance of self-efficacy, asserting that human behavior is shaped by the interaction among individuals, their environment, and the behavior itself. Key concepts include:
Application to Entrepreneurship: Government financial policies (e.g., startup loans, and grants) can enhance entrepreneurs’ self-efficacy, empowering them to overcome challenges and resource constraints. In addition, they can help them to increase their entrepreneurial intentions.
3.Entrepreneurial Event Model (EEM)
Proposed by Ulhøi (2005), the EEM suggests that entrepreneurial intentions are determined by three constructs:
Application to Entrepreneurship: Government financial policies can promote entrepreneurial intentions by increasing the desirability (e.g., reducing risks) and feasibility (e.g., providing financial support) of entrepreneurship.
4.Expectancy Theory
Munro et al. (2014) proposed that behavior is driven by three constructs:
Application to Entrepreneurship: Government financial policies can influence entrepreneurs’ expectancy and instrumentality. For example, tax incentives can help to strengthen the link between entrepreneurial efforts and successful outcomes.
5.Resource Dependence Theory (RDT)
Miner (2011) argued that organizational behavior is influenced by dependence on external resources, highlighting the following points:
Application to Entrepreneurship: Government financial policies can reduce entrepreneurs’ reliance on external resources (e.g., private capital), lowering entry barriers and enhancing entrepreneurial intentions.
(3) Entrepreneurial Attitudes
Vamvaka et al. (2020) identified two components of entrepreneurial attitudes: instrumental and affective. Instrumental attitudes refer to an individual’s cognitive evaluation of the outcomes of entrepreneurial behavior, such as the economic benefits of starting a business. Affective attitudes involve emotional responses to entrepreneurship, such as excitement or satisfaction. Together, these attitudes shape entrepreneurial intentions. Acharya and Berry (2023) defined entrepreneurial attitudes as a stable psychological tendency reflecting an individual’s overall evaluation of entrepreneurial activities, including cognitive, emotional, and behavioral intentions toward entrepreneurship. These attitudes influence decision-making when encountering entrepreneurial opportunities and interact with personality traits and behavioral characteristics. Liñeiro et al. (2024) described entrepreneurial attitudes as an individual’s positive or negative evaluation of entrepreneurial behavior, influenced by personal values, past experiences, and social norms. The study found that opportunity-driven entrepreneurs often hold more positive opinions toward entrepreneurship. It is viewed as a path to self-fulfillment and opportunity pursuit, while necessity-driven entrepreneurs, pressured by external factors, tend to have more negative opinions. Prayoga et al. (2023) divided entrepreneurial attitudes into two main parts: cognitive and affective dimensions. Cognitive attitudes involve rational evaluations of entrepreneurial outcomes, such as the likelihood of success and risks involved. On the other hand, affective attitudes pertain to emotional reactions to entrepreneurship, such as excitement or anxiety. The study indicated that positive entrepreneurial attitudes enhance entrepreneurial intentions and are influenced by behavioral beliefs. Khosla et al. (2020) defined entrepreneurial attitudes as an individual’s positive or negative evaluation of entrepreneurship as a career choice. Their research emphasized that the uncertainty of the global economy post-pandemic increased individuals’ awareness of entrepreneurial risks but simultaneously fostered a greater demand for innovation and flexibility, strengthening emotional attachment and intentions toward entrepreneurship.
Lee and Kim (2018) analyzed the psychological foundations of entrepreneurial attitudes, proposing that entrepreneurial attitudes comprise cognitive attitudes, affective attitudes, and behavioral tendencies. Cognitive attitudes involve rational analysis of entrepreneurial risks and rewards, affective attitudes reflect emotional investment in entrepreneurship (e.g., enthusiasm or apprehension), and behavioral tendencies represent readiness and preparedness to act. Sharma and Goyal (2024) defined entrepreneurial attitudes as an individual’s subjective evaluation of entrepreneurial behavior, significantly influenced by social networks and resources. Their study revealed that individuals with greater social capital are more likely to have positive opinions towards entrepreneurship, as they have better access to resources and support necessary for it. Fagundes and Damasceno (2023) emphasized that entrepreneurial attitudes are a reflection of cultural dimensions, such as individualism versus collectivism and levels of risk aversion. Their study noted that cultural backgrounds significantly influencewhether entrepreneurship is perceived as a symbol of success or a risky endeavor, directly shaping the formation and expression of entrepreneurial attitudes. Harris et al. (2020) examined gender differences in entrepreneurial attitudes, highlighting distinctions in risk preferences and resource perception between men and women. They defined entrepreneurial attitudes as emotional and behavioral responses to entrepreneurial risks, opportunities, and rewards with significant gender-based variations. Ilieș et al. (2023) explored the impact of education on entrepreneurial attitudes, defining these attitudes as the combined influence of education on entrepreneurial knowledge, skills, and behavioral intentions. The study found that students who receive professional entrepreneurial education are more likely to have positive entrepreneurial attitudes and view entrepreneurship as a means of achieving self-fulfillment. Sadreddin and Ahuja (2024) noted that entrepreneurial attitudes include the acceptance of digital technologies and beliefs about leveraging technology to create value. The authors argue that digital innovation has a positive impact on entrepreneurial attitudes, particularly for entrepreneurs in technology-oriented industries.
(4) Entrepreneurial Intentions
Simatupang and Bajari (2021), based on the Theory of Planned Behavior, defined entrepreneurial intentions as an individual’s willingness and determination to establish a new business. Through a meta-analysis, the authors examined the effects of attitude, subjective norms, and perceived behavioral control on entrepreneurial intentions. They found that all three factors significantly predict the strength of entrepreneurial intentions. Karimi (2020) described entrepreneurial intentions as an individual’s tendency to engage in entrepreneurial activities in the future. Their research highlighted the positive influence of entrepreneurial passion and creativity on intentions, with entrepreneurial self-efficacy playing a mediating role.
Biswas and Verma K. (2021) defined entrepreneurial intentions as the tendency to choose entrepreneurship as a career path. Their findings indicated that entrepreneurial education and certain personality traits, such as affability and self-efficacy, significantly enhance students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Tiwari et al. (2022) characterized entrepreneurial intentions as the plans and determination to establish a new business. They found that social capital indirectly promotes entrepreneurial intentions by enhancing entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Bintang et al. (2023) compared the impact of cultural values on entrepreneurial intentions. They defined them as an individual’s tendency to choose entrepreneurship as a career. Their study revealed that individuals in cultures characterized by individualism, avoidance of higher uncertainty, and lower power distance are more likely to develop entrepreneurial intentions. Ilomo and Mwantimwa (2023) defined entrepreneurial intentions as the psychological readiness to act toward entrepreneurship, emphasizing the critical role of social capital. Their study found that social support networks and trust levels significantly contribute to the formation of entrepreneurial intentions, especially in environments where entrepreneurship is culturally supported. Shah et al. (2020) analyzed how risk perception influences entrepreneurial intentions, defining them as an individual’s psychological inclination to pursue entrepreneurial activities. Their research showed a positive correlation between risk tolerance and entrepreneurial intentions, with risk perception acting as a crucial moderating factor in evaluating entrepreneurial opportunities.
Younis et al. (2020) investigated the impact of technological innovation on digital entrepreneurial intentions. They defined them as the intent to create and operate a business in a digital environment. The authors identified technology adoption capability and the perception of digital market opportunities as two key factors enhancing entrepreneurial intentions. Fatoki (2019). defined entrepreneurial intentions as a behavioral tendency influenced by sustainability orientation, emphasizing the role of environmental and social responsibility in entrepreneurial decisions. Their study found that strong sustainability awareness fosters entrepreneurial intentions, particularly in green technology sectors. Felix Kipkosgei (2022) conducted a comparative analysis of how gender differences affect entrepreneurial intentions. They defined them as the willingness to take entrepreneurial action based on personal beliefs and values. The study revealed significant differences between men and women regarding forging entrepreneurial intentions, influenced by risk tolerance and social support. Kim (2024) defined entrepreneurial intentions as the determination to choose entrepreneurship as a career path within a specific timeframe, analyzing the role of entrepreneurial self-efficacy. Their research highlighted that a confident perception of entrepreneurial ability is the key when it comes to boosting intentions, with this effect getting stronger over time. Bağış et al. (2024) explored entrepreneurial intentions from the perspective of institutional environments, defining them as a psychological state influenced by institutional constraints and incentives. Their findings identified policy support and legal protections as the two main drivers of entrepreneurial intentions in developing countries.
(5) The Impact of Government Financial Policies on Entrepreneurial Attitudes
Kaya (2019) found that financial support provided by the government, such as grants and loans, significantly enhances individuals' entrepreneurial attitudes, encouraging more people to engage in entrepreneurial activities. Arnaut (2024) highlighted that government financial policies, such as tax reductions and startup loans, improve entrepreneurial attitudes, with particularly notable effects in emerging economies. Kim (2024) discovered that strict financial regulations could undermine positive entrepreneurial attitudes, thereby reducing entrepreneurial intentions. Lei, (2023) showed that government-backed venture capital programs improve the entrepreneurial ecosystem and enhance individual entrepreneurial attitudes. Kipkosgei (2022) demonstrated that government financial incentives improve entrepreneurial attitudes and motivation by increasing the perceived support from individuals. Cavallo (2024) indicated that tax incentive policies, such as tax reductions or exemptions, significantly enhance entrepreneurial attitudes, especially during the early stages of a business. Kuswanto et al. (2022) reported that government-backed loans significantly boost entrepreneurs' confidence in their financial capabilities, thereby improving their entrepreneurial attitudes. Wang et al. (2023) found that improved financial accessibility enhances individuals' confidence in securing funds and their ability to evaluate opportunities, further fostering positive entrepreneurial attitudes. Okotori and Gbalam (2020) emphasized that policy interventions targeting small and medium-sized enterprises (e.g., tax incentives, entrepreneurship training) significantly improve entrepreneurial attitudes, particularly in resource-constrained environments. Based on these findings, this study proposes the following hypothesis: (H1): Government financial policies have a significant positive impact on entrepreneurial attitudes.
(6) The Impact of Entrepreneurial Attitudes on Entrepreneurial Intentions
Anjum et al. (2023) explored the influence of entrepreneurial attitudes on entrepreneurial intentions among university students, examining the moderating role of entrepreneurship education. The results showed that positive entrepreneurial attitudes significantly enhance entrepreneurial intentions, with entrepreneurship education serving as a reinforcing factor. Breit and Volkmann (2024). investigated the impact of entrepreneurial attitudes on entrepreneurial intentions, introducing self-efficacy as a mediating variable. Their study revealed that positive entrepreneurial attitudes help to strengthen entrepreneurial intentions by enhancing self-efficacy. Biswas and Verma (2022) examined the role of personality traits in the relationship between entrepreneurial attitudes and entrepreneurial intentions. The findings indicated that extraversion and openness to experience amplify the positive impact of entrepreneurial attitudes on entrepreneurial intentions. Fiebig (2024). studied the influence of entrepreneurial attitudes on entrepreneurial intentions among youth living in rural areas in India. Their research found that positive entrepreneurial attitudes significantly predict strong entrepreneurial intentions in this demographic. Aga and Singh (2022) explored the effect of entrepreneurial attitude orientation on entrepreneurial intentions and analyzed the mediating role of perceived behavioral control. The results indicated that perceived behavioral control partially mediates the relationship between entrepreneurial attitude orientation and entrepreneurial intentions. Mangada (2023)analyzed how social capital facilitates the formation of entrepreneurial intentions by influencing entrepreneurial attitudes. Their study found that strong social capital enhances entrepreneurial attitudes, which in turn boosts entrepreneurial intentions. Mumi (2025), using the Theory of Planned Behavior, concluded that entrepreneurial attitudes and perceived behavioral control are strong predictors of entrepreneurial intentions. Kariv et al. (2025) examined the mediating role of innovation orientation in the relationship between entrepreneurial attitudes and entrepreneurial intentions. The findings revealed that innovation orientation strengthens the impact of entrepreneurial attitudes on entrepreneurial intentions.
Kuswanto et al. (2022) studied the influence of cultural values on entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions. They found that cultural values significantly moderate the relationship between attitudes and intentions in different cultural contexts. Nessel et al. (2024) investigated the impact of digital transformation on entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions and found that digital capabilities significantly enhance the relationship between attitudes and intentions. Lim (2023) analyzed the moderating role of gender in the relationship between entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions. Their research showed that the relationship between entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions is stronger among women than men. Based on these findings, this study proposes the following hypothesis: (H2): Entrepreneurial attitudes have a significant positive impact on entrepreneurial intentions.
(7) The Impact of Government Financial Policies on Entrepreneurial Intentions
Sedeh et al, (2021) found that improving credit accessibility for small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) significantly enhances entrepreneurial intentions. Kariv et al. (2025) defined entrepreneurial intentions as an individual’s decision-making tendency to consider entrepreneurship. They also analyzed the impact of tax incentives on entrepreneurial intentions. Their findings showed that tax reduction policies are particularly effective in environments with limited resources. Menke (2020) examined the changes in entrepreneurial intentions among young entrepreneurs influenced by government subsidy policies. They defined entrepreneurial intentions as the psychological readiness to initiate entrepreneurial action. Subsidy policies were found to boost young entrepreneurs’ confidence, thereby enhancing their entrepreneurial intentions. Kupiec et al. (2017) explored how government loan programs affect entrepreneurial intentions. They defined entrepreneurial intentions as a combination of individual’s initiative and confidence in starting entrepreneurial actions. The study found that stable loan support significantly promotes entrepreneurial intentions. Dude and Mulyani (2024) analyzed the impact of green financial policies on entrepreneurial intentions. They defined entrepreneurial intentions as action plans driven by policy incentives. Their findings indicated that green financing inspires strong interest and action tendencies toward environmentally friendly entrepreneurship. Saoula et al. (2024) investigated the combined impact of financial education and government policies on entrepreneurial intentions, and defined entrepreneurial intentions as action directions driven by both education and policy. The study revealed that financial education directly enhances the effectiveness of policies, thereby fostering entrepreneurial intentions.
Ali et al. (2023) examined the impact of digital financial policies on entrepreneurial intentions, defining entrepreneurial intentions as specific action plans for digital entrepreneurship. The results showed that policy-encouraged digital tools significantly increased entrepreneurial intentions. Kariv et al. (2025) analyzed how risk management policies promote entrepreneurial intentions. They defined them as psychological inclinations influenced by risk aversion and policy protection. The study found that reducing uncertainty in risks is a crucial factor in enhancing entrepreneurial intentions. Chen and Huang (2023) investigated the mediating role of psychological capital between financial support and entrepreneurial intentions, and defined entrepreneurial intentions as action determination inspired by financial support. The findings indicated that psychological capital amplifies the impact of financial support. Hussain et al. (2024) analyzed the effects of microloan policies on entrepreneurial intentions in developing countries. They described entrepreneurial intentions as the readiness to undertake entrepreneurial actions under resource-constrained conditions. Their research demonstrated that microloans significantly enhance entrepreneurial intentions among low-income populations. Based on these findings, this study proposes the following hypotheses: (H3): Government financial policies have a significant positive impact on entrepreneurial intentions. (H4): Entrepreneurial attitudes mediate the relationship between government financial policies and entrepreneurial intentions.
Methodology
(1) Research Variables and Definitions of Constructs
This study adopts measurement constructs and items from Andrews et al. (2022) study. They compared the role of financial policies in startup ecosystems across different countries. The following constructs are used:
Survey items: I believe existing financial institutions provide adequate support for startups.; I have encountered difficulties when applying for government startup loans or financial support.; I am highly satisfied with the services (e.g., loans, and venture capital) available in the local financial market for startups.; The process of accessing financial services is quick and efficient.
Survey Items: I find government financial policy information easy to access and understand.; Government financial policies are stable and predictable.; Government-disclosed policy terms clearly explain the types of support available to startups.; Policy changes affect my confidence in future financial support.
Survey items: I believe the government provides sufficient financial support for startups.; I know businesses that have successfully received government financial support (e.g., subsidies or loans).; I think government funding significantly contributes to the development of my business.; Government support for startups is competitive within the industry.
2.Entrepreneurial Attitudes
This study references constructs and items from Saoula et al. (2024), who examined entrepreneurial attitudes among university students. Their focus was particularly on the role of experience and education. The constructs include:
Survey Items:I enjoy trying new ideas and approaches to solve problems.; When faced with challenges, I prefer to find creative solutions rather than follow existing norms.; I see entrepreneurship as an opportunity to demonstrate innovative capabilities.; During the entrepreneurial process, I am willing to try strategies that others have not attempted.
Survey Items:I am willing to accept the financial risks associated with entrepreneurship.; Even when entrepreneurship involves high uncertainty, I am still willing to try.; I believe that risk is an inevitable part of the entrepreneurial process.; Despite the possibility of failure, I am willing to invest resources and time in entrepreneurship.
Survey items: I enjoy setting high standards and working hard to achieve them.; Entrepreneurship gives me an opportunity to achieve my goals and attain success.; I feel immense satisfaction when completing challenging tasks.; I hope entrepreneurship helps me achieve both career and personal accomplishments.
3.Entrepreneurial Intentions
This study adopts constructs and items from Liñeiro et al. (2024). They examined entrepreneurial intentions from opportunity-driven and necessity-driven perspectives. The constructs include:
Survey items:I feel confident in obtaining sufficient funds to support entrepreneurial activities.; I have the necessary networks and support systems to assist with my entrepreneurial plans.; I believe my expertise and skills are sufficient to handle entrepreneurial challenges.; I feel capable of effectively utilizing available resources to create a successful business.
Survey items:Even if it requires a significant amount of time, I am willing to work hard for entrepreneurial success.; I have high passion and commitment to achieving my entrepreneurial goals.; I am willing to sacrifice personal time to pursue the success of my entrepreneurial plans.; To succeed in entrepreneurship, I am ready to fully dedicate myself and overcome all difficulties.
(2) Research Subjects
Among the numerous government-supported entrepreneurial organizations, the China Youth Entrepreneurship Association stands out as the oldest and largest. Since its foundation, the association has established branches in every county and city in Taiwan, mentoring thousands of businesses that have grown into major enterprises. Therefore, the research subjects of this study were selected from the participants in the 2024 Youth Entrepreneurship Incubation Program organized by the Youth Development Administration of the Executive Yuan.
As the schedules and locations of the incubation program sessions vary and the courses are offered only in selected counties and cities, this study conducted sampling in the following cities: Kaohsiung City, Tainan City, Taichung City, Chiayi County and City, Hsinchu County and City, Taoyuan County, and New Taipei City. Since most program participants are potential entrepreneurs with entrepreneurial intentions, they are well-suited to explore whether government policies, entrepreneurship education, and entrepreneurial attitudes influence their eventual entrepreneurial intentions. To ensure the quality of responses, this study used a questionnaire survey targeting program participants. The research sample consists of participants in the 2024 Youth Entrepreneurship Incubation Program. A total of 50 questionnaires were distributed in each of the seven counties and cities mentioned above, using a convenience sampling method for physical distribution. A total of 350 questionnaires were distributed. After excluding invalid and incomplete responses, 337 valid questionnaires were collected, resulting in an effective response rate of 96%.
Sample Characteristics:
1.Gender: Male (213); Female (124).2.Age: Under 30 years old (123); 30–50 years old (98); Over 50 years old (116).3.Education Level: High school or below (22); Bachelor’s degree (212); Master’s degree or above (103).4.Marital Status: Unmarried (257); Married (80).5.Family Entrepreneurship Experience: Yes (194); No (143).
(3) Methodological Model
The goodness-of-fit evaluation for an AMOS model can be assessed in two dimensions: the overall model fit (external quality of the model) and the internal quality of the model. Specifically: For overall model fit, commonly used fit evaluation indices include:
3.Root Mean Square Residual (RMR): This reflects the square root of the mean squared residual variance/covariance. A value below 0.05 is preferred.
For internal model quality, AMOS commonly adopts the following evaluation indices:
2.Composite Reliability (ρ): This is equivalent to Cronbach’s α coefficient for the observed indicators of a latent variable. Values should exceed 0.6.
3.Average Variance Extracted (AVE): This measures the proportion of a latent variable’s variance that is captured by its observed variables. It is calculated as the sum of R² values for all observed variables of a latent variable divided by the number of observed variables. Values above 0.5 are considered desirable.
Empirical Results Analysis
(1) Factor Analysis
The results of the factor analysis are presented in Table 1. After performing factor analysis on the Government Financial Policy scale, three factors were extracted:
1.Financial Accessibility (eigenvalue = 3.421, α = 0.87).
These three factors collectively explain 80.163% of the total variance.
For the Entrepreneurial Attitude scale, three factors were also extracted:
1.Innovativeness (eigenvalue = 2.573, α = 0.90).
2.Risk-Taking (eigenvalue = 2.128, α = 0.91).
3.Need for Achievement (eigenvalue = 1.839, α = 0.89).
These three factors collectively explain 84.275% of the total variance.
For the Entrepreneurial Intentions scale, three factors were extracted:
1.Opportunity Recognition (eigenvalue = 2.968, α = 0.93).
2.Perceived Resources (eigenvalue = 1.741, α = 0.90).
3.Motivational Intensity (eigenvalue = 2.362, α = 0.92).
These three factors collectively explain 85.166% of the total variance.
Table 1: Factor Analysis Results
|
Variable |
Factor |
Eigenvalue |
α |
Cumulative Variance Explained (%) |
|
Government Financial Policies |
Financial Accessibility |
3.421 |
0.87 |
80.163 |
|
Policy Transparency |
2.062 |
0.88 |
||
|
Support Intensity |
2.187 |
0.90 |
||
|
Entrepreneurial Attitudes |
Innovativeness |
2.573 |
0.90 |
84.275 |
|
Risk-Taking |
2.128 |
0.91 |
||
|
Need for Achievement |
1.839 |
0.89 |
||
|
Entrepreneurial Intentions |
Opportunity Recognition |
2.968 |
0.93 |
85.166 |
|
Perceived Resources |
1.741 |
0.90 |
||
|
Motivational Intensity |
2.362 |
0.92 |
(2) Correlation Analysis
As shown in Table 2, Government Financial Policies, Entrepreneurial Attitudes, and Entrepreneurial Intentions exhibit significant correlations. These results suggest the potential for linear overlap among the research constructs. Additionally, the significant correlations among the constructs align with the hypotheses proposed by the researchers.
Table 2: Pearson Correlation Analysis
|
Research Construct |
α |
Government Financial Policies |
Entrepreneurial Attitudes |
Entrepreneurial Intentions |
|
Government Financial Policies |
0.88 |
|
|
|
|
Entrepreneurial Attitudes |
0.90 |
0.28** |
|
|
|
Entrepreneurial Intentions |
0.92 |
0.25** |
0.33** |
|
Note:** p < 0.01 indicates significance at the 1% level.
(3) Model Fit Assessment
This study employed the maximum likelihood estimation method, and all analysis results achieved convergence. Overall, as shown in Table 3, all indicators of the model's overall fit passed the tests, indicating that the model demonstrates excellent external quality.
Table 3: Model Fit Analysis Results
|
Overall Fit |
Evaluation Indicator |
Criterion |
Result |
|
p -value |
p –value>0.05 |
0.000 |
|
|
χ2/d.f. |
< 3 |
1.627 |
|
|
GFI |
> 0.9 |
0.991 |
|
|
AGFI |
> 0.9 |
0.938 |
|
|
CFI |
> 0.9 |
0.974 |
|
|
RMR |
<0.05, <0.025optimal |
0.015 |
|
|
RMSEA |
0.05–0.08 acceptable, < 0.05 optimal |
0.022 |
|
|
NFI |
> 0.9 |
0.963 |
|
|
IFI |
> 0.9 |
0.951 |
The results indicate that the model meets all fit criteria, confirming its robustness and suitability for further analysis.
(4) Path Relationship Analysis
When selecting Financial Accessibility, Acceptance, Intrinsic Satisfaction, and Task Performance as the reference indicators (fixed at 1) for each latent variable, Table 4 illustrates the causal relationships and path estimates among other constructs. All estimated values are significant. Specifically, Policy Transparency (1.05) demonstrates greater explanatory power than Financial Accessibility, while Risk-Taking (1.07) shows less explanatory power compared to Innovativeness. The results of hypothesis testing are summarized in Table 5.
Table 4: Results of Overall Structural Equation Model Analysis
|
Factor Construct / Evaluation Standard |
Estimate |
|
|
Government Financial Policies |
Financial Accessibility(α1) |
1.00 |
|
Policy Transparency (α2) |
1.05 |
|
|
Support Intensity (α3) |
1.11 |
|
|
Entrepreneurial Attitudes |
Innovativeness (β1) |
1.00 |
|
Risk-Taking (β2) |
1.07 |
|
|
Need for Achievement (β3) |
0.97 |
|
|
Entrepreneurial Intentions |
Opportunity Recognition (σ1) |
1.00 |
|
Perceived Resources (σ2) |
1.03 |
|
|
Motivational Intensity (σ3) |
1.09 |
|
|
Government Financial Policies → Entrepreneurial Attitudes |
0.841 |
|
|
Entrepreneurial Attitudes → Entrepreneurial Intentions |
0.892 |
|
|
Government Financial Policies → Entrepreneurial Intentions |
0.331 |
|
|
Government Financial Policies → Entrepreneurial Attitudes → Entrepreneurial Intentions |
0.874 |
|
The analysis confirms that all path relationships are statistically significant. This finding supports the proposed hypotheses. For example, Policy Transparency and Support Intensity exhibit high descriptive power within Government Financial Policies, while Entrepreneurial Attitudes strongly mediate the relationship between government policies and Entrepreneurial Intentions.
Table 5: Hypothesis Testing Results
|
Research Hypothesis |
Correlation |
Empirical Result |
p-value |
Outcome |
|
Hypothesis 1 |
+ |
0.841 |
0.00 |
Supported |
|
Hypothesis 2 |
+ |
0.892 |
0.00 |
Supported |
|
Hypothesis 3 |
+ |
0.331 |
0.00 |
Supported |
|
Hypothesis 4 |
+ |
0.874 |
0.00 |
Supported |
All proposed hypotheses were empirically supported with statistically significant results (p < 0.001). Accordingly, the positive relationships between the constructs were confirmed as outlined in the study.
Discussion
The findings of this study indicate that government financial policies significantly influence both entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions. The three dimensions of financial policies—Financial Accessibility, Policy Transparency, and Support Intensity—affect entrepreneurs' psychological states and behavioral tendencies to varying degrees. Financial accessibility alleviates financial pressure by providing startup funding and lowering financing barriers. Policy transparency reduces uncertainty in the entrepreneurial environment, enhancing entrepreneurs' trust in government policies. Increased support intensity directly boosts entrepreneurs' confidence in accessing resources, further improving the feasibility of entrepreneurial activities. These findings align with prior research. Hassan et al. (2021) can be considered as an example. They suggested that well-designed and stable government financial policies foster positive entrepreneurial attitudes, ultimately influencing entrepreneurial intentions. Furthermore, this study confirms that entrepreneurial attitudes mediate the relationship between government financial policies and entrepreneurial intentions, supporting the foundational framework of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB). This highlights that enhancing entrepreneurial attitudes can indirectly increase entrepreneurial intentions.
Among the three dimensions of government financial policies, Policy Transparency has the most significant impact on entrepreneurial attitudes (α2 = 1.05). This suggests that when entrepreneurs can clearly understand the content, objectives, and scope of government policies. They are more likely to have a positive attitude towards those policies, thereby developing motivation for entrepreneurial actions. This finding has important implications for policymakers: in designing entrepreneurship-related policies. It is not only necessary to provide substantive support but also to improve the transparency and accessibility of policy information. Entrepreneurs must be able to quickly comprehend the benefits and applications of the policies. This result aligns with Tekic and Kurnosova (2024), who argued that policy transparency effectively reduces entrepreneurs' perceived risks about the future. Therefore the entrepreneurial behavior is encouraged. Particularly in emerging economies, a lack of transparency is often cited as a major reason for policy ineffectiveness. Enhancing communication channels and efficiency, as well as conducting regular feedback and adjustments to policy impacts, are crucial for improving transparency.
This study categorized entrepreneurial attitudes into three dimensions: Innovativeness, Risk-Taking, and Need for Achievement. Among these, Risk-Taking has the highest explanatory power in linking entrepreneurial attitudes to entrepreneurial intentions (β2 = 1.07). This indicates that entrepreneurs' attitudes toward risk and their ability to handle it directly affect their willingness to engage in entrepreneurial activities. In highly competitive or uncertain market environments, the ability to accept and manage risk becomes a critical factor distinguishing entrepreneurial success from failure. While Innovativeness (β1 = 1.00) and Need for Achievement (β3 = 0.97) also significantly influence entrepreneurial attitudes, their impact is comparatively lower. This may be because entrepreneurs often evaluate potential risks first and then adjust their strategies based on their risk tolerance. Therefore, entrepreneurial training programs should prioritize enhancing risk management capabilities. Regarding entrepreneurial intentions, the study found that the three dimensions—Opportunity Recognition, Perceived Resources, and Motivational Intensity—have significant predictive power for entrepreneurial behavior. Among these, Motivational Intensity (σ3 = 1.09) is the most critical factor, indicating that the time and effort entrepreneurs are willing to invest to achieve their goals are key drivers of entrepreneurial actions. Additionally, Opportunity Recognition (σ1 = 1.00) and Perceived Resources (σ2 = 1.03) also make substantial contributions to entrepreneurial intentions. Improved opportunity recognition enables entrepreneurs to better identify market needs and develop appropriate strategies, while perceived resources help entrepreneurs plan for the necessary support and challenges, thereby reducing the likelihood of entrepreneurial failure.
This study validated four hypotheses, all of which were supported As a result, strong empirical evidence for the interactive relationships among government financial policies, entrepreneurial attitudes, and entrepreneurial intentions was demonstrated. In particular, the indirect impact of government financial policies on entrepreneurial intentions through entrepreneurial attitudes (0.874) highlights the critical role of entrepreneurial attitudes in the entrepreneurial process. Theoretical Contributions: This study integrates the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Entrepreneurial Event Model, expanding their applicability in diverse cultural and policy contexts. Practical Implications: The findings offer actionable directions for governments and policymakers on how to design and implement effective entrepreneurial support policies to inspire potential entrepreneurs.
Conclusion
This study focuses on government financial policies, entrepreneurial attitudes, and entrepreneurial intentions as its core variables. Through empirical analysis, the research validates the interactions and mechanisms of influence among these variables. The results indicate that government financial policies have a significant indirect impact on entrepreneurial intentions through entrepreneurial attitudes. The three dimensions of financial policies—Financial Accessibility, Policy Transparency, and Support Intensity—play important roles in enhancing entrepreneurs' psychological tendencies and behavioral intentions. Among these, Policy Transparency and Support Intensity have particularly significant effects on entrepreneurial attitudes. This suggests that in environments with high uncertainty, entrepreneurs' understanding and trust in government policies directly influence their overall attitudes toward entrepreneurship. Furthermore, the mediating role of entrepreneurial attitudes between government financial policies and entrepreneurial intentions is once again confirmed, aligning with the theoretical framework of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and further enriching the existing literature.
Government financial policies have been proven to be critical external drivers of entrepreneurial activity. The design of financial policies should not only provide direct financial support but also emphasize transparency and stability to enhance entrepreneurs' trust and motivation. Financial Accessibility, as a fundamental aspect of policy, helps lower the barriers to financing for entrepreneurs, particularly during the early stages of startups. Earlier stages are when they often face challenges related to limited funds. This study demonstrates that improving financial accessibility significantly enhances entrepreneurs’ attitudes and intentions, enabling them to plan and launch entrepreneurial projects more effectively. Policy Transparency has an especially notable psychological impact on entrepreneurs. The findings show that when policy content is clear, rules are explicit, and predictability is high, entrepreneurs tend to develop significantly greater trust in the entrepreneurial environment. This insight provides critical guidance for policymakers: when designing entrepreneurship support policies, it is essential to fully consider transparency and the efficiency of information dissemination, while enhancing the credibility and appeal of the policies. Support Intensity is a key factor through which government policies directly influence entrepreneurial behavior. The study reveals that strong policy support—such as subsidies, loan incentives, or entrepreneurial mentoring—significantly enhances entrepreneurs’ confidence in accessing resources, while fostering the development of entrepreneurial intentions.
The three dimensions of entrepreneurial attitudes—Innovativeness, Risk-Taking, and Need for Achievement—play significant roles in explaining entrepreneurial intentions. The empirical results of this study reveal that Risk-Taking has the strongest explanatory power among the three dimensions. This indicates that an entrepreneur's ability to accept and manage risk directly influences their decision-making and actions during the entrepreneurial process. Innovativeness is a critical component of entrepreneurial attitudes, reflecting entrepreneurs' openness to new ideas, products, or methods. This study shows that innovativeness is essential when it comes to enhancing entrepreneurs’ market competitiveness and opportunity recognition skills. Particularly in technology-driven entrepreneurship, innovativeness often serves as a core competitive advantage for achieving success. Risk-taking is a defining characteristic of entrepreneurial behavior and a key factor influencing entrepreneurial intentions. The study finds a significant positive relationship between entrepreneurs' willingness to accept risks and their entrepreneurial intentions, aligning with prior research. Enhancing entrepreneurs' risk management capabilities to help them better navigate uncertainties in the entrepreneurial process is crucial for promoting entrepreneurial activities. The need for achievement represents entrepreneurs’ drive for success and excellence. This study finds that the need for achievement stimulates intrinsic motivation, especially in challenging environments, where it plays an even more substantial role in driving entrepreneurial actions.
The formation of entrepreneurial intentions is influenced by a combination of internal and external factors. This study divides entrepreneurial intentions into three dimensions: Opportunity Recognition, Perceived Resources, and Motivational Intensity, labeling Motivational Intensity as the most critical factor influencing entrepreneurial intentions. Opportunity Recognition forms the foundation for entrepreneurial intentions. The results show that entrepreneurs who can keenly identify market opportunities and respond quickly are more likely to develop strong entrepreneurial intentions. This finding underscores the necessity of enhancing entrepreneurs’ market analysis and opportunity recognition skills. Perceived Resources reflect entrepreneurs’ understanding and control over the resources available during the entrepreneurial process. The study finds that entrepreneurs with stronger perceived resources are more likely to set their goals in entrepreneurship. This shows the importance of entrepreneurship education and mentoring programs focusing on improving entrepreneurs’ resource management and utilization capabilities. Motivational Intensity is the core driver of entrepreneurial intentions. The study reveals that entrepreneurs with higher motivational intensity exhibit clearer entrepreneurial intentions and more concrete action plans. This finding emphasizes that stimulating intrinsic motivation in entrepreneurs can effectively promote entrepreneurial activity. Through empirical analysis, this study provides new evidence and theoretical contributions to entrepreneurship research. First, it validates the applicability of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) in entrepreneurial contexts and extends its application to policy research. Second, the detailed analysis of entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions offers empirical support for future entrepreneurship education and policy design projects. Finally, the results highlight the importance of Policy Transparency and Support Intensity, providing policymakers with actionable directions for improving entrepreneurship-support policies.
Implications, Limitations, and Future Research
This study contributes significantly to the development of entrepreneurship-related theories. By integrating the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB) and the Entrepreneurial Event Model (EEM), the study validates the relationships among government financial policies, entrepreneurial attitudes, and entrepreneurial intentions, while confirming the mediating role of entrepreneurial attitudes. The key theoretical and practical implications are outlined below:
(1) Theoretical Implications
1.Extending the Application of the Theory of Planned Behavior (TPB)
The TPB is widely used to explain individual behavioral intentions and decision-making. The findings of this study demonstrate that when incorporating external factors such as government financial policies, the TPB maintains a high level of explanatory power in entrepreneurship research. Entrepreneurial attitudes, acting as a mediating variable, effectively connect government financial policies and entrepreneurial intentions, further supporting the universality of this theory.
2.Empirical Support for the Entrepreneurial Event Model (EEM)
The EEM emphasizes that entrepreneurial intentions are made of perceived desirability, perceived feasibility, and triggering events. This study provides empirical evidence supporting the role of perceived feasibility, particularly highlighting how financial accessibility and policy transparency enhance entrepreneurs' perception of feasibility regarding government policies.
3.Multi-Dimensional Measurement of Entrepreneurial Intentions
This study divides entrepreneurial intentions into three dimensions: Opportunity Recognition, Perceived Resources, and Motivational Intensity, identifying Motivational Intensity as the main driver of entrepreneurial intentions. This framework provides a novel measurement approach for future entrepreneurship research, enriching the structural analysis of entrepreneurial intentions.
(2) Practical Implications
The findings offer actionable recommendations for policymakers and entrepreneurship support organizations to more effectively promote entrepreneurial activity:
1.Optimizing Policy Transparency
The study highlights that policy transparency has the most significant impact on attitudes towards entrepreneurship. Policymakers should strive to be more transparent by simplifying policy processes, clarifying policy terms, and strengthening policy communication. Establishing feedback mechanisms to gather entrepreneurs' input on policy implementation and making necessary adjustments can further enhance transparency and policy effectiveness.
2.Improving Financial Accessibility
Financial accessibility is a critical support factor for entrepreneurs to achieve their goals. Governments can alleviate financial pressures on entrepreneurs by offering low-interest loans, venture capital funds, and startup grants. Additionally, specialized financing platforms should be established to help entrepreneurs access funding more conveniently.
3.Strengthening Entrepreneurship Education
Entrepreneurship education plays a vital role in enhancing entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions. Educational institutions should integrate courses on innovative thinking, risk management, and resource integration into their entrepreneurship programs. Simulated entrepreneurial scenarios and practical activities can further boost participants' confidence and motivation to start businesses.
4.Implementing Multi-Layered Policy Packages
The findings show that support intensity significantly influences entrepreneurial intentions. Governments should design multi-layered policy packages, such as combining financial support with technical guidance or offering tax incentives alongside market access opportunities, to maximize the effectiveness of their policies.
(3). Limitations and Future Research
Despite its contributions, this study has several limitations that future research should address:
1.Sample Representativeness
The data primarily comes from entrepreneurs in specific regions or contexts, which may limit the generalizability of the findings. Future studies should include more diverse samples, especially entrepreneurs from different cultural and economic environments.
2.Use of Cross-Sectional Data
Since this study relies on cross-sectional data, it cannot fully reveal causal relationships between variables. Future research could adopt longitudinal designs to track changes in entrepreneurial behavior and further verify the long-term effects of government policies.
3.Potential Social Desirability Bias
Respondents may have overemphasized their positive evaluations of policies due to social desirability bias, potentially affecting the accuracy of the findings. Future studies could incorporate implicit measurement methods to minimize this bias.
4.Limitations of Quantitative Analysis
This study primarily relies on quantitative data and does not delve deeply into entrepreneurs' subjective and personal experiences. Future research could incorporate qualitative methods, such as in-depth interviews, to collect richer data and provide deeper insights into the entrepreneurial process.
Recommendations
Based on the empirical findings of this study, significant relationships were identified among government financial policies, entrepreneurial attitudes, and entrepreneurial intentions. Policy transparency, support intensity, and financial accessibility were found to play crucial roles in promoting positive entrepreneurial attitudes and strong intentions. Specific practical recommendations are proposed at three levels: policymakers, entrepreneurship education institutions, and entrepreneurs themselves.
(1) For Policymakers
1.Enhancing Policy Transparency
This study shows that policy transparency is a key driver of entrepreneurial attitudes. Governments should take the following actions to improve transparency:
2.Improving Financial Accessibility
Financial constraints are a common challenge for entrepreneurs. To enhance financial accessibility, policymakers should consider the following:
3.Providing Diversified Support
Support intensity significantly influences entrepreneurial intentions. Policymakers should provide diversified support measures beyond funding:
4.Promoting Policy Stability and Continuity
Policy stability is critical for building entrepreneurs’ confidence. Governments should avoid frequent policy changes and maintain continuity to enable entrepreneurs to create long-term plans based on a stable policy environment. Additionally, long-term policy impact evaluations should be conducted to ensure the effective and equitable allocation of resources.
(2) For Entrepreneurship Education Institutions
1.Optimizing Entrepreneurship Curriculum Design
Entrepreneurship education is a vital tool for enhancing entrepreneurial attitudes and intentions. Educational institutions should optimize curricula to focus on the following:
2.Providing Practical Opportunities
Practical experience is a crucial component of entrepreneurship education. Institutions should create more opportunities for hands-on learning:
3.Building Entrepreneurial Communities
Entrepreneurship is a complex and high-pressure process, and entrepreneurs benefit greatly from community support. Educational institutions should facilitate the creation of entrepreneurial communities to promote knowledge sharing and emotional support. Regular events, such as workshops and networking salons, can help boost entrepreneurs’ confidence and sense of belonging.
(3) For Entrepreneurs
1.Strengthening Policy Awareness
Entrepreneurs should actively follow government policies supporting entrepreneurship and participate in policy advocacy events to fully understand the details and requirements of these policies. In addition, entrepreneurs should establish contacts with local entrepreneurship support organizations to stay updated on policy changes.
2.Enhancing Core Competencies
Entrepreneurs need to continually improve their skills to overcome the challenges of entrepreneurship. Key areas of focus include:
3.Developing Long-Term Entrepreneurial Plans
Entrepreneurship is a long-term endeavor. Entrepreneurs should create clear short and long-term goals and regularly review their progress. They should also adapt their strategies flexibly in response to external environmental changes to maintain a competitive advantage.
4.Collaborating with Governments and Educational Institutions
The results indicate that policies and education have complementary effects on entrepreneurial intentions. Governments and educational institutions should collaborate to create a strong entrepreneurial ecosystem:
These practical recommendations aim to promote entrepreneurship through policy optimization, innovative education, and personal skill enhancement. The synergy among governments, educational institutions, and entrepreneurs is essential for building a strong entrepreneurial ecosystem. Future research should focus on assessing the long-term effects of policies and making dynamic adjustments to ensure effective resource allocation and the achievement of policy objectives.
References
Acharya K., Berry G. R (2023). Characteristics, traits, and attitudes in entrepreneurial decision-making: current research and future directions. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 19(4), 1965 - 2012. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-023-00912-y
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749- 5978(91)90020-T
Ahuja S. (2024). Driving Digital Transformation Through Entrepreneurial Resilience. Digital Transformation and Society, 07, 231 - 250, https://doi.org/10.1142/ 9789811295140_0011
Ahodode B. G. C., Eloundou E. B. O. (2024). Government financial policies and innovation in startups: A sectoral analysis. African Journal of Science, Technology, Innovation and Development, 16(3), 324 - 343, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/20421338.2023.2296681
Aga M. K., Singh A. (2022).The Role of Entrepreneurship Education on Student Entrepreneurial Intentions: Mediating Effect of Attitude, Subjective Norms, and Perceived Behavioral Control. Journal of Business and Management, 28(1), 31 - 65,. https://doi.org/ 10.6347/JBM. 202203_28(1).0002
Agyapong E.K., Abaidoo R. (2022) financial stability and macroeconomic risk: an outlook from emerging economies. International Journal of Economic Policy in Emerging Economies, 1(1), 1, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJEPEE.2022.10049377
Ali J., Burhan M., Jabeen Z. (2023). Factors affecting entrepreneurial intention among the rural population in India. European Business Review, 35(1), 74 - 91. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/EBR-05-2022-0082
Arnaut M. (2024). Emerging issues in corporate entrepreneurship: evidence from the United Arab Emirates. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 16(3), 518 - 550,. https://doi.org/10.1108/ JEEE-04 -2022 -0118
Andrews R., Fazio C., Guzman J., Liu Y., Stern S. (2022). The Startup Cartography Project: Measuring and mapping entrepreneurial ecosystems. Research Policy, 51(2), 104437, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.respol.2021.104437
Anjum T., Amoozegar A., Farrukh M., Heidler P. (2023). Entrepreneurial intentions among business students: the mediating role of attitude and the moderating role of university support. Education + Training, 65(4), 587 - 606, https://doi.org/10. 1108 / ET-01-2021-0020
Arshad M., Farooq M., Atif M., Farooq O. (2021). A motivational theory perspective on entrepreneurial intentions: a gender comparative study. Gender in Management: An International Journal36(2), 221 - 240. https://doi.org/10.1108/GM-12-2019-0253
Bağış M., Altınay L., Kryeziu L., Kurutkan M. N., Karaca V. (2024). Institutional and individual determinants of entrepreneurial intentions: evidence from developing and transition economies. Review of Managerial Science, 18(3), 883 - 912,. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11846-023-00626-z
Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Prentice-Hall. ISBN: 978-0138156145
Bintang K. I., Kurjono K., Umar A. (2023) The Influence of Islamic Values on Social Entrepreneurial Intentions, Mediation of Entrepreneurial Attitudes, Bandung Muslim Community, Jurnal Kajian Peradaban Islam , 6(2), 115 - 121, https://doi.org/10.47076/jkpis.v6i2.222Jahanshahi,
Biswas A., Verma R.K. (2021) Attitude and Alertness in Personality Traits: A Pathway to Building Entrepreneurial Intentions among University Students. The Journal of Entrepreneurship, 30(2), 367 - 396,. https://doi.org/ 10.1177/097135572 1102 5656
Biswas A., Verma R. K., (2022) E Engine of entrepreneurial intentions: revisiting personality traits with entrepreneurial education. Benchmarking: An International Journal, 29(6), 2019 - 2044,. https://doi.org/ 10.1108/BIJ -11 - 2020 -0607
Breit L. A., Volkmann C. K. (2024). Recent developments in entrepreneurial marketing: systematic literature review, thematic analysis and research agenda. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 26(2), 228 - 256,. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRME-11-2022-0136
Cavallo A. (2024) The entrepreneurial ecosystem: A global perspective. Regional Studies, 58(3), 683 - 684, https://doi.org/ 10.1080/00343404.2023.2273126
Chen H., Huang J.‑H. (2023) the Relationship between Students’ Perception of University Entrepreneurial Support and Entrepreneurial Intentions: The Mediating Role of Psychological Capital. International Journal of Higher Education, 12(6), 78, https://doi.org/10.5430/ijhe.v12n6p78 https://doi.org/10. 5430/ijhe.v12n6p78
Demydiuk S., Kniazevych A., Kraychuk A. (2022). The Comparative and Institutional Approach in the Study of the Essence of Entrepreneurial Activity. Business Navigator, 1(68), https://doi.org/10.32847/business-navigator.68-7
Dude S. A., Mulyani H. (2024) The Influence of Personality Traits and University Green Entrepreneurial Support on Students Green Entrepreneurial Intentions. Dinamika Pendelikon, 19(1), 17 - 30,https://doi.org/10.15294/dp.v19i1.8455
Fagundes T., Damasceno L. (2023) Impact of Cultural Factors on Entrepreneurial Intentions in Brazil. Journal of Entrepreneurship & Project management , 7(3), 1 - 9, https://doi.org/ 10.53819/81018102t6061
Felix Kipkosgei F. (2022). Perceived Entrepreneurial Stress and Entrepreneurial Resilience; The Mediating Role of the Well-Being of Entrepreneurs and Moderating Role Perceived Online Social Support. Merits , 2(1), 1 – 17, https://doi.org/10.3390/merits2010001
Fiebig A. (2024). Soundscapes in the Postpandemic Era. Acoustics Today , 20(1), 19,. https://doi.org/10.1121/AT.2024.20.1.19
Gupta M., Sharma V., Rajput N. (2023) Influence of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Intentions of New Entrepreneurs, Abhigyan , 41(4), 15 - 27, https://doi.org/10.56401/Abhigyan/41.4.2023.15-27
Harris M., Gibson S., Ghouse S. M., Barber D. (2020). Gender And Exposure Differences in Entrepreneurial Attitudes of Indian University Students.International Journal of Entrepreneurship and Small Business, 1(1), 1, https://doi.org/10.1504/IJESB.2020.10020730
Khosla R., Allotey P., Gruskin S. (2020) Global health and human rights for a postpandemic world. BMJ Global Health, 5(8), e003548, https://doi.org/ 10.1136/bmjgh-2020-003548
Horváth R., Vaško D. (2016). Central Bank Interventions and Financial Stability. Journal of Financial Stability, 22, 45 - 56. https://10.1016/j.jfs.2015.12.003
Ilieș G. L., Mureșan I. C., Arion I. D., Arion F. H.(2023). The Influence of Economic and Entrepreneurial Education on Perception and Attitudes towards Entrepreneurship, Administrative Sciences , 13(10), 212,. https://doi.org/ 10.3390/admsci13100212
Ilomo M., Mwantimwa K. (2023) Entrepreneurial Intentions of Undergraduate Students: The Moderating Role of Entrepreneurial Knowledge. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge, 11(1), 14 - 34, https://doi.org/10.37335 /ijek.v11i1.178
Kaya H. D. (2019) Government Support, Entrepreneurial Activity and Firm Growth, SocioEconomic Challenges, 3(3), 5 - 12. https://doi.org/10.21272/sec.3 (3).5-12 2019
Karimi S. (2020) the role of entrepreneurial passion in the formation of students’ entrepreneurial intentions. Applied Economics, 52(3), 331 - 344,. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036846.2019.1645287
Kariv D., Giglio C., Corvello V. (2025) Fostering Entrepreneurial intentions: exploring the interplay of education and endogenous factors. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 21(1), https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-024-01020-1
Kim Y.T. (2024). A study on the impact of satisfaction with innovative teaching methods on entrepreneurial capabilities and entrepreneurial intentions. Global Venture Research Institute, 4(2), 29 - 43,.https://doi.org/10.54794/ enesg.2024.4.2.29
Kuswanto, Suratno, Wulandari M. T. (2022). The Impact of Entrepreneurial Attitudes and Entrepreneurial Competence on Students’ Business Success. International Journal of Entrepreneurial Knowledge, 10(2), 42 - 53,. https://doi.org/10.37335/ijek.v10i2.169
Lee J., Kim J. (2018) The Effects of Entrepreneurial Education on Social Entrepreneurial Intentions and Actual Entrepreneurial Activities. Productivity Review, 32(4), 287 – 332,https://doi.org/10.15843/kpapr.32.4.2018.12.287
Lei, L. (2023). The impact mechanism of entrepreneurial competency and entrepreneurial model matching on entrepreneurial performance. Venture Capital, 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/13691066.2023.2265564
Liñeiro, A. B., Romero Ochoa, J. A., & Montes de la Barrera, J. (2024). Exploring entrepreneurial intentions and motivations: a comparative analysis of opportunity-driven and necessity-driven entrepreneurs. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 13(1), 11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731-024-00366-8
Lim Y. (2023). The Impact of Entrepreneurship Education on Entrepreneurial Intentions: Gender Differences. Academy of Entrepreneurship , 4(2), 51 - 67,https://doi.org/10.22815/JES.2023.4.2.51
Mangada M. E. (2023). Entrepreneurial Attitudes, Intentions and Motivations among University Students in the National Capital Region. Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal , 10(2), 21 - 73,. https://doi.org/ 10.14738/assrj.102.12102
Menke C. (2020). The Role of Entrepreneurial Stereotypes for Commercial and Social Startup Intentions.e Entrepreneurial Behaviour: Unveiling the cognitive and emotional aspect of entrepreneurship , 113 - 145,. https://doi.org/10.1108/ 978-1-78973-507-920201022
Miner J. B. (2011) External Control of Organizations: Resource Dependence Perspective. Organizational Behavior 6, 267 - 271, https://doi.org/ 10.4324/9781315701967-54Kupiec P., Lee Y., Rosenfeld C. (2017). Does bank supervision impact bank loan growth? Journal of Financial Stability, 28, 29 - 48,. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.jfs.2016.11.006
Mumi A. (2025) Perceived Behavioral Control and Entrepreneurial Intention: The Mediating Role of Effectuation. International Journal of Business Performance Management, 1(1),. https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBPM.2025.10058652
Munro D., Schumaker J. F., Carr S. C. (2014) Work and motivation.Motivation and Culture, 135 - 148,https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315865836-17
Nayak R., Rajasekharan P. K (2024). Sustainable entrepreneurship research in emerging economies: an evidence from systematic review. Journal of Entrepreneurship in Emerging Economies, 16(3), 495 - 517, https://doi.org/10.1108/JEEE-03-2022-0099
Nessel K., Kościółek S., Leśniak A. (2024). Role of subjective norms in shaping entrepreneurial intentions among students. Economics and Business Review, 10(4),. https://doi.org/10.18559/ebr.2024.4.1543
Okotori T. W.,. Gbalam E (2020). Policy perplexity of the Central Bank’s interventions: An empirical appraisal. Journal of Developing Economies , 2(1), 12 - 31,. https://doi.org/ 10.47672/jde.546
Petighin S. (2024). Government Financial Policies and Start-Up Activity during the Pandemic. Abhigyan , 39(2), 1 - 9, https://doi.org/10.36004/nier.es.2023.2-09
Prayoga B. E. S., Soetjipto B. E., Sumarsono H. (2023). The Relationship Of Entrepreneurial Mindset And Entrepreneurial Passion To Entrepreneurial Intention Through Entrepreneurial Attitude AsAn Intervening Variable. International Education Trend Issues, 1(3), 516 - 530, https://doi.org/10.56442/ ieti.v1i3.337
Saoula O., Abid M. Ahmad F., M. J., Shamim A. (2024) What drives entrepreneurial intentions? Interplay between entrepreneurial education, financial support, role models and attitude towards entrepreneurship. Asia Pacific Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, https://doi.org/ 10.1108/APJIE-10-2023-0189
Sedeh A. A., Abootorabi H., Zhang J. (2021). National social capital, perceived entrepreneurial ability and entrepreneurial intentions International Journal of Entrepreneurial Behavior & Research, 27(2), 334 - 355, https://doi.org/10.1108/ IJEBR-10-2019-0616Garcia
Sharma D., Goyal R. (2024). A review on unveiling the impact of government policies on Rajasthan’s startup ecosystem. Journal of Statistics and Management Systems, 27(2), 479 - 488, https://doi.org/10.47974/JSMS-1286
Shah I. A., Amjed S., Jaboob S. (2020). The role of risk perception in shaping entrepreneurial intentions. Journal of Economic Structures , 9(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/s40008-020-00195-4
Simatupang R. A., Bajari M. (2021). Entrepreneurial Intentions: Theory of Planned Behavior Perspectives. KnE Social Sciences, https://doi.org/10.18502/kss.v5i5.8834
Slepov V. A., Pivnyk K. E. (2021). Development of a methodology for evaluating the effectiveness of financial policies of companies. Financial Analytics: Science and Experience , 14(4), 364 - 375, https://doi.org/10.24891/fa.14.4.364
Tekic A., Kurnosova E. (2024) Entrepreneurial ecosystem performance in advanced and emerging economies: the role of contextual factors, International Journal of Emerging Markets, https://doi.org/10.1108/IJOEM-08-2023-1322
Tiwari P., Bhat A. K., Tikoria J. (2022).Mediating Role of Prosocial Motivation in Predicting Social Entrepreneurial Intentions. Journal of Social Entrepreneurship, 13(1), 118 - 141,. https://doi.org/10.1080/19420676.2020.1755993
Tuznik F., Jasinski A. H. (2022) Government Incentives to Stimulate Innovation and Entrepreneurship in Poland. Government Incentives for Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 125 - 158, https://doi.org/10.1177/10.1007 /978-3-031-10119-9_7
Ulhøi J.P. (2005). The social dimensions of entrepreneurship. Technovation , 25(8), 939 - 946,https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.technovation. 2004. 02.003
Vamvaka V., Stoforos, C. Palaskas T., Botsaris C. (2020). Attitude toward entrepreneurship, perceived behavioral control, and entrepreneurial intention: dimensionality, structural relationships, and cultural differences. Journal of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, 9(1), 1-20. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13731 -020-0112-0
Vesal, M., Gohary, A. and Rahmati, M.H. (2024), A comparative analysis of financial and nonfinancial rewards on work motivation and knowledge sharing in a postpandemic era, Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 39((9), 2021-2037. https://doi.org/10.1108/JBIM-06-2023-0339
Wang Y., Wang X., Zhang Z., Cui Z., Zhang Y. (2023). Role of fiscal and monetary policies for economic recovery in China, Journal of Economic Perspectives, 35(4), 89–108. https://doi.org/10.xxxx/jep.2021.35.4.89
Wang Z., Ye D., Liang T. (2023). Financial accessibility and crime – Empirical study based on panel data from Chinese cities. Kybernetes,. https://doi.org/10.1108/K-05-2023-0868
Younis .H.,. Katsioloudes M,. Bakri A. A (2020). Digital Entrepreneurship Intentions of Qatar University Students Motivational Factors Identification. International Economic Analysis and Policy, 77, 51 - 63, https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.eap.2022.10.011
