Neoliberal entrepreneurship theory holds that institutions, not individuals, create entrepreneurial supply

Evidence

In any case Giersch declined the invitation offered by several authors to integrate entrepreneurship into the realm of macroeconomic neoclassical equilibrium thinking. The important link between Schumpeter, Mises, Kirzner, Schmölders, and Giersch is the emphasis on market process, dynamic, and change. The vastly expanded vision of individual entrepreneurship we already found in the writing of Mises and expressed by some of the speakers at the 1970 MPS conference was thereby consolidated in a theoretical position, and was ready to be projected to ever wider classes of citizens within corporations (intrapreneurship) and outside. The underemployed and unemployed are turned into self-employed, provided the political institutions are adequately reformed and the incentives are right. Giersch calls this the demand side for entrepreneurship, “the demand permitted, induced or actively provoked by the socio-economic structure and the political and cultural environment.” The demand for entrepreneurship, in other words, depends on the social arrangements in support of economic freedom. — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 307

Categorization

• DEFINE: Establishes Giersch’s ‘demand side for entrepreneurship’ concept — that entrepreneurial activity is institutionally enabled rather than innate.
• XREF: Connects to the broader neoliberal shift from the employed worker to the self-employed subject — the ‘entrepreneur of the self’ prominent in Foucault’s lectures and later work on precarity. — connects to: Neoliberal scholars redefined their target as the entrepreneurial function, not individual entrepreneurs — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 289; Neoliberal development theory saw poverty as institutional failure in cultivating entrepreneurial — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market: Human Rights…, 408; The entrepreneurship agenda required actively reshaping state and corporate institutions, not leaving individuals alone — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 309

Broader Connections

• Neoliberal scholars redefined their target as the entrepreneurial function, not individual entrepreneurs #expands (0.90) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 289
• Neoliberal development theory saw poverty as institutional failure in cultivating entrepreneurial #expands (0.82) — Jessica Whyte, The Morals of the Market, 408
• The entrepreneurship agenda required actively reshaping state and corporate institutions, not leaving individuals alone #expands (0.78) — Dieter Plehwe, Quinn Slobodian & Philip Mirowski (eds.), Nine Lives of Neoliberalism, 309