Falta de cultura ciudadana.

Mainstream interpretations and definitions of entrepreneurship or entrepreneur have their own history dating back as far as the 19th century. In a survey of the origins and meaning of the term, Dana and Anderson (2007, p. 3) pointed out some of the early definitions. For example, Jean Baptiste Say (1816) defined an entrepreneur as ―the individual who unites all means of production and who finds in the value of the products...the re-establishment of the capital he employs, and value of the wages, the interest, and the rent which he pays as well as the profits belonging to himself‖. Say perceived the entrepreneur as someone who had the ability to bring the factors of production together so as to create new economic wealth. Dana and Anderson also pointed out that Mill (1848) considered entrepreneurship to be ―direction, supervision, control and risk taking, with risk being the main distinguishing feature between the manager and the owner-manager‖. Schumpeter (1934, p. 34) stated ―the carrying out of new combinations we call ‗enterprise‘; the individuals whose function it is to carry them out we call entrepreneurs‖. Moreover Schumpeter viewed entrepreneurs as energetic leaders motivated by will rather than intelligence (Peet & Hartwick, 2009, p. 55). Fraser (1937) associated entrepreneurs with the management of a business unit, profit taking, business innovation, and risk bearing, whilst Weber (1930) stressed that entrepreneurs were filled with Calvinist8 ideas concerning the value of hard work and capital accumulation. Calvinist ideas promote the thinking that through hard

22

work and self-discipline, one is able to see the fruit of their own labour and thus, it is important to maintain frugal attitudes and work ethics in order to achieve such.

With regard to these mainstream definitions and interpretations, it seems that entrepreneurship or being an entrepreneur involves taking risks and managing or controlling one‘s own capital or resources with the aim of maximising profits and gaining material wealth for one‘s own individual gain. Such definitions and interpretations can be viewed as likely to be more Western in nature and they also fit in with Modernisation Theory. In addition, Dana & Anderson (2007, p. 3) asserted that mainstream interpretations of entrepreneurship do not seem to include the influence of indigenous knowledge and values, further stating that ―the culture of indigenous people is often incompatible with the basic assumptions of mainstream theories‖. Hence, Dana‘s view emphasised the differing meanings and interpretations of entrepreneurship and the importance of culture in shaping these.

Other definitions and interpretations that emerged seem to differ from those found in the mainstream. For example, Casson (1982, p. 1 as cited in Dana & Anderson, 2007)) defined an entrepreneur as ―someone who specialises in taking judgemental decisions about the coordination of scarce resources‖. This is interesting because of the different views and interpretations held by people and cultures concerning what is meant by ‗resource‘. That which one individual views as a resource may vary quite a bit from what someone from another culture or society defines as a resource, given their own circumstances. In addition, Dana (1995, p. 67) pointed out that the same is true for the word ‗opportunity‘, where the act of identifying or responding to opportunities can be described in culture-bound ways. He suggested that ―entrepreneurship should not be defined on the basis of opportunity, but rather cultural perceptions of opportunity‖. In addition, he wrote that what may be presented as an opportunity for some people, may be less of an opportunity for others with different sets of values. Hence, Dana (1999, p. 1) later referred to entrepreneurship simply as ―the economic undertaking of entrepreneurs‖.

Interestingly, other recent writers have considered entrepreneurship differently. For example, Diochon (2003, p. 4) pointed out that Galtung (1981) defined entrepreneurship as being the ―cornerstone of self-reliance and autonomy‖. Galtung‘s view seems to indicate entrepreneurship‘s contribution and important role it can play in the undertaking of self-reliance and autonomy. Indeed, Diochon later emphasised her view of the significant role entrepreneurship can play in the development process if ―community-based development‖ is the goal to be realised. Such views indicate there are lots of different tenets on which the meaning and interpretation of entrepreneurship can be based.

23

Of particular interest to this thesis is the definition and interpretation of ‗indigenous entrepreneurship‘. Fascinating studies on this concept have been carried out by many experts and analysts. For example, McGregor (2004, pp. 389-90) recognised that ―indigenous people have developed a knowledge base that ensured survival in particular environments for countless generations‖. Indeed, McGregor emphasised the relevance of important principles and values such as respect, reciprocity, coexistence, and harmony which are still needed in contemporary times if entrepreneurial skills within these contexts are to be further developed. In addition, Morgan (1991), in referring to indigenous people and their survival, affirmed that their continued existence throughout the centuries has been a result of the sustainability of their enterprises. Hence, in such contexts it can be stated that indigenous peoples have had to develop entrepreneurial skills to survive conditions in their given environments. In further analysing these definitions and interpretations, entrepreneurship for indigenous peoples is not necessarily about maximising profits and wealth for individual gains, but rather entrepreneurship is about survival and maintaining those principles and values that are important within society.

From the mainstream to more recent definitions and interpretations, it is agreed that entrepreneurship is viewed and practiced differently in different contexts. Mainstream interpretations seem to associate it with westernised modes of capitalism, whereas other interpretations have argued for the significance of indigenous knowledge and values that make up people‘s cultures in determining entrepreneurial activities in their own contexts.