Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Examines social capital structure and its impact on entrepreneurial growth in low-income subsistence entrepreneurs, suggesting tailored support strategies.
This study examines the structure of social capital among subsistence entrepreneurs and the implications for entrepreneurial development. Although most policies and research prioritize opportunity-driven ventures, subsistence entrepreneurship remains the most widespread—yet underexplored—form of business activity in low-income contexts. Using egocentric network data from 183 subsistence entrepreneurs in Bogotá, Colombia, three structural indicators—network size, homophily and weighted degree centralization—were assessed. A fuzzy clustering approach revealed three recurrent network configurations, plus a residual group, each associated with distinct capacities for access to resources, resilience and potential pathways to formalization. Findings demonstrate that subsistence entrepreneurs are far from homogeneous. Highly centralized and homogeneous networks are linked to greater vulnerability and isolation, whereas diverse and decentralized ties enhance adaptive capacity and institutional linkage. These results highlight the value of structural network analysis for identifying patterns of social capital that can inform differentiated strategies of support. For ecosystem actors—such as chambers of commerce, universities and public entrepreneurship agencies—these insights provide guidance for designing interventions tailored to the heterogeneity of subsistence entrepreneurship. By shifting attention to the structural underpinnings of informal ventures, this study contributes to advancing inclusive and context-sensitive entrepreneurial development.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Sánchez et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: